- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT00771758
Tapentadol IR vs Oxycodone IR vs Placebo in Acute Pain From Vertebral Compression Fracture Associated With Osteoporosis
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Oxycodone Immediate Release (IR)-Controlled Study of Tapentadol IR for the Treatment of Acute Pain Caused by Vertebral Compression Fractures Associated With Osteoporosis
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Phase 3
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Alabama
-
Haleyville, Alabama, United States
-
Tallassee, Alabama, United States
-
-
Arizona
-
Peoria, Arizona, United States
-
Tucson, Arizona, United States
-
-
California
-
Encinitas, California, United States
-
Los Gatos, California, United States
-
Mission Viejo, California, United States
-
Oakland, California, United States
-
Roseville, California, United States
-
San Diego, California, United States
-
Studio City, California, United States
-
Vista, California, United States
-
-
Florida
-
Bradenton, Florida, United States
-
Hialeah, Florida, United States
-
Kissimmee, Florida, United States
-
Miami Springs, Florida, United States
-
Ormond Beach, Florida, United States
-
Saint Cloud, Florida, United States
-
Vero Beach, Florida, United States
-
-
Georgia
-
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
-
Gainesville, Georgia, United States
-
Peachtree, Georgia, United States
-
Savannah, Georgia, United States
-
Valdosta, Georgia, United States
-
-
Illinois
-
Bloomington, Illinois, United States
-
-
Indiana
-
South Bend, Indiana, United States
-
-
Louisiana
-
Covington, Louisiana, United States
-
-
Minnesota
-
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
-
-
New York
-
North Massapequa, New York, United States
-
-
North Carolina
-
Hickory, North Carolina, United States
-
-
Ohio
-
Akron, Ohio, United States
-
Canton, Ohio, United States
-
Marion, Ohio, United States
-
-
Oregon
-
Eugene, Oregon, United States
-
-
South Carolina
-
Aiken, South Carolina, United States
-
-
Texas
-
Houston, Texas, United States
-
Mesquite, Texas, United States
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Female (non-pregnant, non-lactating) and male
- new onset of pain or acute exacerbation of previous pain associated with a VCF within 14 days prior to Visit 1
- Radiographic confirmation of a VCF within 3 months prior to Visit 1 or a radiographic procedure performed at Visit 1
- Average back pain intensity score in the last 24 hours related to the current episode and a qualifying current back pain intensity score
- Qualifying score on the Mini-Mental Status Exam
- Able to verbalize and differentiate with regard to location and intensity of pain
- Medically stable
- Sexually active women must be postmenopausal for at least 1 year, surgically sterile, or practicing an effective method of birth control at study entry and throughout the trial
- Women of childbearing potential must have a negative urine pregnancy test at Visit 1
- Physically and mentally willing and able to adhere to the protocol requirements and its prohibitions and restrictions
- Sign an informed consent document
Exclusion Criteria:
- Neurological symptoms or deficits, or radiculopathy related to the VCF
- Taken any of the following in the month before Visit 1: long-acting or controlled-release opioid, immediate release Class II opioid formulations or Class III opioid formulation (e.g., Tylenol with Codeine) > 5 days/week
- Systemic steroid therapy within 3 months before Visit 1
- Anticonvulsants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, neuroleptics, or serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor within 2 weeks before randomization
- Major trauma to or infection in the fractured vertebrae in the 6 months preceding study
- Pain due to herniated nucleus pulposus, high energy trauma, severe spinal stenosis, bone tumor at the level(s) of pathology or known canal compromise causing clinical manifestations of cord, neural foramen, or nerve root compression with an ongoing pain level of >= 5
- Severe cardiopulmonary deficiencies
- Active systemic or local infection
- History of alcohol or drug abuse in the investigator's judgment based on medical history and physical examination
- Malignancy within the past 2 years, with the exception of basal cell carcinoma
- Concomitant autoimmune inflammatory conditions
- History of laboratory values reflecting severe renal insufficiency
- History of moderately or severely impaired hepatic function or alanine aminotransaminase or aspartate aminotransferase greater than 3 times the upper limit of normal.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: TREATMENT
- Allocation: RANDOMIZED
- Interventional Model: PARALLEL
- Masking: QUADRUPLE
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
EXPERIMENTAL: 001
tapentadol IR 50 or 75 mg capsule every 4 - 6 hr as needed for up to 10 days maximum daily dose 450 mg
|
50 or 75 mg capsule every 4 - 6 hr as needed for up to 10 days
|
EXPERIMENTAL: 002
oxycodone IR 5 or 10 mg capsule every 4 - 6 hr as needed for up to 10 days maximum daily dose 60 mg
|
maximum daily dose 450 mg
|
PLACEBO_COMPARATOR: 003
placebo 1 capsule every 4 - 6 hr as needed for up to 10 days
|
5 or 10 mg capsule every 4 - 6 hr as needed for up to 10 days
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Sum of Pain Intensity Difference Over 3 Days (SPID72)
Time Frame: 3 Days (72 hours)
|
Pain Intensity (PI) was assessed on 11-point numerical rating scale from 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as you can imagine. Pain Intensity Difference (PID) was the difference between baseline PI (prior to the first dose) and current PI at assessment. SPID72 was calculated as the time-weighted Sum of PID scores over 72 hours. The range of SPID72 is from -720 to 720. The higher value in SPID indicates greater pain relief. The study was terminated prematurely due to slow enrollment after 108 of 600 subjects enrolled. Valid statistical conclusions cannot be made due to the low number of subjects. |
3 Days (72 hours)
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
30% Responder Rate on Day 3.
Time Frame: Day 3
|
The 30% responder rate was defined as the proportion of participants with a value of percentage change greater than or equal to the 30% from baseline in pain intensity at Day 3 (average of Day 3 PM and Day 4 AM).
|
Day 3
|
50% Responder Rate on Day 3.
Time Frame: Day 3
|
The 50% responder rate was defined as the proportion of participants with a value of percentage change greater than or equal to the 50% from baseline in pain intensity at Day 3 (average of Day 3 PM and Day 4 AM).
|
Day 3
|
30% Responder Rate on Day 5.
Time Frame: Day 5
|
The 30% responder rate was defined as the proportion of participants with a value of percentage change greater than or equal to the 30% from baseline in pain intensity at Day 5 (average of Day 5 PM and Day 6 AM).
|
Day 5
|
50% Responder Rate on Day 5.
Time Frame: Day 5
|
The 50% responder rate was defined as the proportion of participants with a value of percentage change greater than or equal to the 50% from baseline in pain intensity at Day 5 (average of Day 5 PM and Day 6 AM).
|
Day 5
|
30% Responder Rate on Day 10.
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The 30% responder rate was defined as the proportion of participants with a value of percentage change greater than or equal to the 30% from baseline in pain intensity at Day 10 (average of Day 9 PM and Day 10 AM).
|
Day 10
|
50% Responder Rate on Day 10.
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The 50% responder rate was defined as the proportion of participants with a value of percentage change greater than or equal to the 50% from baseline in pain intensity at Day 10 (average of Day 9 PM and Day 10 AM).
|
Day 10
|
Sum of Pain Intensity Difference Over 2 Days (SPID48)
Time Frame: 2 Days (48 hours)
|
Pain Intensity (PI) was assessed on 11-point numerical rating scale from 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as you can imagine.
Pain Intensity Difference (PID) was the difference between baseline PI (prior to the first dose) and current PI at assessment.
SPID48 was calculated as the time-weighted Sum of PID scores over 48 hours.
The range of SPID48 is from -480 to 480.
The higher value in SPID indicates greater pain relief.
|
2 Days (48 hours)
|
Sum of Pain Intensity Difference Over 5 Days (SPID120)
Time Frame: 5 Days (120 hours)
|
Pain Intensity (PI) was assessed on 11-point numerical rating scale from 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as you can imagine.
Pain Intensity Difference (PID) was the difference between baseline PI (prior to the first dose) and current PI at assessment.
SPID120 was calculated as the time-weighted Sum of PID scores over 120 hours.
The range of SPID120 is from -1200 to 1200.
The higher value in SPID indicates greater pain relief.
|
5 Days (120 hours)
|
Sum of Pain Intensity Difference Over 10 Days
Time Frame: 10 Days (216 Hours)
|
Pain Intensity (PI) was assessed on 11-point numerical rating scale from 0=no pain to 10=pain as bad as you can imagine.
Pain Intensity Difference (PID) was the difference between baseline PI (prior to the first dose) and current PI at assessment.
Sum of Pain Intensity Difference Over 10 Days was calculated as the time-weighted Sum of PID scores up to Day 10, 8 AM.
The range is from -2160 to 2160.
The higher value in Sum of Pain Intensity Difference indicates greater pain relief.
|
10 Days (216 Hours)
|
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) Over 2 Days
Time Frame: 2 Days (48 Hours)
|
Pain Relief was defined as a 5-point categorical scale of 0-4 (0=none, 1=A little, 2=Some, 3=A lot, 4=Complete).
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) was calculated as the time-weighted sum over all pain relief up to hour 48.
The range of TOTPAR over 2 days is from 0 to 192.
A higher value in TOTPAR indicated greater pain relief.
|
2 Days (48 Hours)
|
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) Over 3 Days
Time Frame: 3 Days (72 Hours)
|
Pain Relief was defined as a 5-point categorical scale of 0-4 (0=none, 1=A little, 2=Some, 3=A lot, 4=Complete).
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) was calculated as the time-weighted sum over all pain relief up to hour 72.
The range of TOTPAR over 3 days is from 0 to 288.
A higher value in TOTPAR indicated greater pain relief.
|
3 Days (72 Hours)
|
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) Over 5 Days
Time Frame: 5 Days (120 Hours)
|
Pain Relief was defined as a 5-point categorical scale of 0-4 (0=none, 1=A little, 2=Some, 3=A lot, 4=Complete).
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) was calculated as the time-weighted sum over all pain relief up to hour 120.
The range of TOTPAR over 5 days is from 0 to 480.
A higher value in TOTPAR indicated greater pain relief.
|
5 Days (120 Hours)
|
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) Over 10 Days
Time Frame: 10 Days (216 Hours)
|
Pain Relief was defined as a 5-point categorical scale of 0-4 (0=none, 1=A little, 2=Some, 3=A lot, 4=Complete).
Total Pain Relief (TOTPAR) was calculated as the time-weighted sum over all pain relief up to Day 10, 8 AM.
The range of TOTPAR over 10 days is from 0 to 864.
A higher value in TOTPAR indicated greater pain relief.
|
10 Days (216 Hours)
|
Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) Over 2 Days
Time Frame: 2 Days
|
The Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) was derived from Sum of TOTPAR and SPID.
The range of SPRID over 2 days is from -480 to 672.
A higher value in SPRID indicated greater pain relief.
|
2 Days
|
Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) Over 3 Days
Time Frame: 3 Days
|
The Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) was derived from Sum of TOTPAR and SPID.
The range of SPRID over 3 days is from -720 to 1008.
A higher value in SPRID indicated greater pain relief.
|
3 Days
|
Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) Over 5 Days
Time Frame: 5 Days
|
The Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) was derived from Sum of TOTPAR and SPID.
The range of SPRID over 5 days is from -1200 to 1680.
A higher value in SPRID indicated greater pain relief.
|
5 Days
|
Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) Over 10 Days
Time Frame: 10 Days
|
The Sum of Total Pain Relief and Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPRID) was derived from Sum of TOTPAR and SPID.
The range of SPRID over 10 days is from -2160 to 3024.
A higher value in SPRID indicated greater pain relief.
|
10 Days
|
Change From Baseline in Physical Performance: Measured Walk - Change in Distance Walked in the End of Study
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The participants were assessed whether were able to walk for 4 meters at each visit.
For those subjects who were unable to walk 4 meters, the distance walked would be recorded.
For those completed the walk, 4 meters were recorded.
The change in distance walked at the end of study was derived using the distance walked at baseline minus the distance walked at the end of study (Day 10).
The range of change in distance walked is from -4 to 4. A negative value indicated better performance.
|
Day 10
|
Change From Baseline in Physical Performance: Measured Walk - Change in Time Taken Per Meter to Take Walk in the End of Study
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The time for the subject to walk for 4 meters was measured at baseline and the end of study.
Change = baseline - end of study.
For the change in each treatment group, only subjects who were assessed at both baseline and end of study were summarized.
A positive value of Change indicated performance improved.
|
Day 10
|
Change From Baseline in Physical Performance: Chair Stand - Change in Number of Chair Stands Completed in the End of Study
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The participants were assessed whether were able to rise from a chair 5 times at each visit.
For those subjects who were unable to complete all 5 rises, the number of rises would be recorded.
For those completed the 5 rises, 5 were recorded.
The change in number of chair stands at the end of study was derived using the number of chair stands at baseline minus the number of chair stands at the end of study (Day 10).
The range of change in number of chair stands is from -5 to 5. A negative value indicated better performance.
|
Day 10
|
Change From Baseline in Physical Performance: Chair Stand - Change in Time Taken to Complete Chair Stands in the End of Study
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The time for the subject to rise from a chair 5 times was measured at baseline and the end of study. Change = baseline - end of study. For the change in each treatment group, only subjects who were assessed at both baseline and end of study were summarized. A positive value of Change indicated performance improved. |
Day 10
|
Summary of Subject Satisfaction With Treatment on Day 2
Time Frame: Day 2
|
Treatment satisfaction was measured using a 7-point scale where 1 = very satisfied and 7 = very dissatisfied.
|
Day 2
|
Summary of Subject Satisfaction With Treatment on Day 3
Time Frame: Day 3
|
Treatment satisfaction was measured using a 7-point scale where 1 = very satisfied and 7 = very dissatisfied.
|
Day 3
|
Summary of Subject Satisfaction With Treatment on Day 5
Time Frame: Day 5
|
Treatment satisfaction was measured using a 7-point scale where 1 = very satisfied and 7 = very dissatisfied.
|
Day 5
|
Summary of Subject Satisfaction With Treatment on Day 10
Time Frame: Day 10
|
Treatment satisfaction was measured using a 7-point scale where 1 = very satisfied and 7 = very dissatisfied.
|
Day 10
|
Sleep Quality - Shift From Baseline to End of Study (Tapentadol IR)
Time Frame: 10 days
|
Sleep Quality was assessed by a 4-point numeric scale (1=excellent, 2=good, 3=fair, and 4=poor).
The sleep question was "Please rate the overall quality of your sleep last night.",
which was administered via Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system in the morning.
|
10 days
|
Sleep Quality - Shift From Baseline to End of Study (Oxycodone IR)
Time Frame: 10 days
|
Sleep Quality was assessed by a 4-point numeric scale (1=excellent, 2=good, 3=fair, and 4=poor).
The sleep question was "Please rate the overall quality of your sleep last night.",
which was administered via IVR system in the morning.
|
10 days
|
Sleep Quality - Shift From Baseline to End of Study (Placebo)
Time Frame: 10 days
|
Sleep Quality was assessed by a 4-point numeric scale (1=excellent, 2=good, 3=fair, and 4=poor).
The sleep question was "Please rate the overall quality of your sleep last night.",
which was administered via IVR system in the morning.
|
10 days
|
Summary of Functionality: Dressing - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 2
Time Frame: Day 2
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 2
|
Summary of Functionality: Dressing - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 3
Time Frame: Day 3
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 3
|
Summary of Functionality: Dressing - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 5
Time Frame: Day 5
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 5
|
Summary of Functionality: Dressing - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 10
Time Frame: Day 10
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 10
|
Summary of Functionality: Bath/Shower - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 2
Time Frame: Day 2
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 2
|
Summary of Functionality: Bath/Shower - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 3
Time Frame: Day 3
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 3
|
Summary of Functionality: Bath/Shower - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 5
Time Frame: Day 5
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 5
|
Summary of Functionality: Bath/Shower - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 10
Time Frame: Day 10
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 10
|
Summary of Functionality: Chair - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 2
Time Frame: Day 2
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 2
|
Summary of Functionality: Chair - Proportion With at Least 2 Point of Improvement From Baseline to Day 3
Time Frame: Day 3
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 3
|
Summary of Functionality: Chair - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 5
Time Frame: Day 5
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 5
|
Summary of Functionality: Chair - Proportion With at Least 2 Points of Improvement From Baseline to Day 10
Time Frame: Day 10
|
Level of functionality assessed using a 5-point scale where 0=no difficulty and 4=impossible without help.
|
Day 10
|
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at End of Study
Time Frame: Day 10
|
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) was defined as the 7-point numeric scale, where 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse.
|
Day 10
|
Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGIC) at End of Study
Time Frame: Day 10
|
Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was defined as the 7-point numeric scale, where 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse.
|
Day 10
|
Summary of Clinician Ease-of-Care at the End of Study: Time Comsuming
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The Clinician Ease-of-Care was defined on a 6-point scale, where 0 = "not at all" to 5="a very great deal."
|
Day 10
|
Summary of Clinician Ease-of-Care at the End of Study: Bothersome
Time Frame: Day 10
|
The Clinician Ease-of-Care was defined on a 6-point scale, where 0 = "not at all" to 5="a very great deal."
|
Day 10
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Collaborators
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ESTIMATE)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
- Metabolic Diseases
- Pain
- Neurologic Manifestations
- Fractures, Bone
- Wounds and Injuries
- Musculoskeletal Diseases
- Bone Diseases
- Bone Diseases, Metabolic
- Osteoporosis
- Acute Pain
- Fractures, Compression
- Physiological Effects of Drugs
- Adrenergic Agents
- Neurotransmitter Agents
- Molecular Mechanisms of Pharmacological Action
- Central Nervous System Depressants
- Peripheral Nervous System Agents
- Analgesics
- Sensory System Agents
- Analgesics, Opioid
- Narcotics
- Neurotransmitter Uptake Inhibitors
- Membrane Transport Modulators
- Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors
- Oxycodone
- Tapentadol
Other Study ID Numbers
- CR015064
- KF5503/40
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Back Pain
-
Dow University of Health SciencesRecruitingLow Back Pain | Chronic Low-back Pain | Low Back Pain, Mechanical | Mechanical Low Back Pain | Pain, Chronic | Pain, Back | Lower Back Pain Chronic | CLBP - Chronic Low Back PainPakistan
-
Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de...CompletedLow Back Pain, Mechanical | Low Back Pain, Postural | Lower Back Pain Chronic | Low Back Pain, Posterior CompartmentBrazil
-
University of Colorado, BoulderNational Institutes of Health (NIH); Radiological Society of North America; Psychophysiologic... and other collaboratorsCompletedChronic Pain | Back Pain Lower Back Chronic | Back Pain, LowUnited States
-
Federal University of Minas GeraisRecruitingBack Pain | Low Back Pain | Chronic Low-back Pain | Back Pain Lower Back ChronicBrazil
-
Marco LoggiaNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)Active, not recruitingLow Back Pain | Pain, Chronic | Back Pain Lower Back Chronic | Back Pain With Radiation | Back Pain Without Radiation | Back AcheUnited States
-
Carilion ClinicVirginia Center for Health InnovationEnrolling by invitationBack Pain | Back Pain Lower Back Chronic | Back Pain, LowUnited States
-
Canandaigua VA Medical CenterFoot Levelers, Inc.; Northeast College of Health SciencesTerminatedBack Pain Lower Back ChronicUnited States
-
Dan RhonNational Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH); 59th Medical... and other collaboratorsRecruitingLow Back Pain | Chronic Pain | Surgery | Back Pain Lower Back Chronic | Back Pain, LowUnited States
-
Balgrist University HospitalUniversity of Zurich, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention InstituteCompletedBack Pain | Back Pain With Radiation | Back Pain, LowSwitzerland
-
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterWithdrawnBack Pain, Low | Back Pain Without RadiationUnited States
Clinical Trials on tapentadol IR
-
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development...Grünenthal GmbHCompleted
-
Janssen Research & Development, LLCCompletedHallux ValgusKorea, Republic of
-
Janssen-Cilag International NVGrünenthal GmbHCompleted
-
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development...Grünenthal GmbHCompleted
-
Ortho-McNeil Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLCGrünenthal GmbHCompleted
-
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development...Completed
-
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development...Grünenthal GmbHTerminatedArthroplastyUnited States, United Kingdom, Belgium, Spain, Canada, Finland, New Zealand, Sweden
-
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development...Grünenthal GmbHCompletedOsteoarthritis | Arthralgia | Pain Assessment
-
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development...Grünenthal GmbHCompletedArthralgia | Bunion | Hallux Valgus | Pain Assessment | Tapentadol
-
Bioxodes S.A.Completed