Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 102-20 | Other Identifier | registry identifier |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Biogen | INDUSTRY |
This study will assess the safety and efficacy of rituximab combined with MTX in participants with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to anti-Tumor Necrosis (TNF) alpha therapy. The anticipated time in the study is up to 2 years and the target sample size is 500 participants. Eligible participants may receive re-treatment with rituximab under a separate protocol WA17531.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo Plus Methotrexate | Placebo Comparator | Participants will be administered placebo by intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg per os (p.o.) or parenterally once a week up to 24 weeks and will be followed up to Week 104. |
|
| Rituximab plus Methotrexate | Experimental | Participants will be administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and will be followed up to Week 104. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MabThera/Rituxan | Drug | 1 |
| |
| Methotrexate |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20 Response at Week 24 | American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response is defined as >= 20% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both tender joint count (TJC)-68 joints and swollen joint count (SJC)-66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from score 0 (no pain) to 100 (unbearable pain); Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging score 0 (no disease activity) to 100 (maximum disease activity); Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do) for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either C-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). | Week 24 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 24 | ACR 50 response is defined as a >= 50% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both TJC -68 joints and SJC -66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no pain to score '100'=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no disease activity to score '100'=maximum disease activity; HAQ : Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either CRP or ESR. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical Trials | Hoffmann-La Roche | Study Chair |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Birmingham | Alabama | 35294 | United States | |||
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22127691 | Derived | Lal P, Su Z, Holweg CT, Silverman GJ, Schwartzman S, Kelman A, Read S, Spaniolo G, Monroe JG, Behrens TW, Townsend MJ. Inflammation and autoantibody markers identify rheumatoid arthritis patients with enhanced clinical benefit following rituximab treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Dec;63(12):3681-91. doi: 10.1002/art.30596. | |
| 18512710 |
Not provided
Not provided
Of the total randomized 520 participants who met the eligibility criteria, four did not receive the study treatment and were not included in any analysis population.
A total of 520 participants were enrolled in the study conducted from 02 May 2003 and 12 July 2012 in 11 countries.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Placebo Plus Methotrexate | Eligible participants were administered the placebo by intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with methotrexate (MTX) 10-25 milligrams (mg) per os (p.o.) or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
| FG001 | Rituximab Plus Methotrexate |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Week 24 Analysis |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Drug |
2 |
|
| Placebo | Other | 3 |
|
| Week 24 |
| Number of Participants With ACR 70 Response at Week 24 | ACR 70 response is defined as a >= 70% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both TJC -68 joints and SJC -66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no pain to score '100'=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no disease activity to score '100'=maximum disease activity; HAQ : Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either CRP or ESR. | Week 24 |
| Mean Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score of 28 Joints at Week 24 | The disease activity score (DAS28) is an evaluation index of rheumatoid arthritis. The DAS28 applies a mathematical formula based on the following parameters: 1. TJC-28 joints, 2. SJC -28 joints, 3. ESR or CRP measurement, 4. Participant's judgement on his own overall health (global health [GH]) status expressed by a VAS (0 [no disease activity] to 100 [maximum disease activity]). The mathematical formula is 0.56 × √28TJC + 0.28 × √28SJC + 0.7 x loge ESR + 0.014 × GH. The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10, where lower scores indicate best disease control and higher scores indicate worsening of disease. Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With DAS28 Low Disease Activity and DAS28 Remission at Week 24 | The DAS28 is an evaluation index of RA. The DAS28 applies a mathematical formula based on the following parameters: 1. TJC- 28 joints, 2. SJC- 28 joints, 3. ESR or CRP measurement, 4. Participant's judgement on his own overall health status (GH) expressed by a visual analogue scale VAS (0 [no disease activity] to 100 [maximum disease activity]). The mathematical formula is 0.56 × √28TJC + 0.28 × √28SJC + 0.7 x loge ESR + 0.014 × GH. The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10. A participant was categorized as having low disease activity, if participant's DAS28 score was <= 3.2, and was categorized as having clinical remission if participant's DAS28 score was < 2.6. | Week 24 |
| Number of Participants With Good, Moderate, or no European League Against Rheumatism Responses at Week 24 | European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response is defined based on the DAS28 score and the EULAR response criteria (Van Gestel et al, 1996 and 1999). The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10, where lower scores indicate best disease control and higher scores indicate worsening of disease. At a given visit, participants with a DAS28 score of < 3.2 are considered good responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is >1.2. Participants with a DAS28 score >= 3.2 to 5.1 are considered moderate responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is <=1.2 to >=0.6. Participants with DAS28 score >5.1 are considered non-responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is <=1.2 to >=0.6. | Week 24 |
| Percentage Change From Baseline in the ACR Core Set (SJC, TJC, Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments, Health Assessment Questionnaire, Pain, C-Reactive Protein, and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) Score | Percentage change in the scores of the following parameters of ACR core set relative to respective baseline scores in both study arms was analyzed : SJC (28 and 66 joints) and TJC (28 and 66 joints), patient's global assessment and physician's global assessment based on disease activity (both are expressed by VAS [0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity]), HAQ (based on HAQ disability index [HAQDI]) which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst), pain assessment using a VAS ranging from score 0 (no pain) to 100 (unbearable pain), CRP concentration, and ESR. | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| Mean Change From Baseline of Short Form 36 Total Scores at Week 24 | The Short Form (SF)-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Transforming and standardizing these domains leads to the calculation of the physical component summary and mental component summary measures. Scores on each item were summed and averaged (range 0 [worst] to 100 [best]); increase in score from baseline indicated improvement. Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| Number of Participants With Categorical Change From Baseline in the Physical Component Scores of SF-36 | The SF-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing :1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Scores on physical component were summed and averaged (range 0 [worst] to 100 [best]); If participants' had shown change from baseline in physical health component score >5.42, it was considered as improved; score between -5.42 to 5.42 was considered as unchanged, and score < -5.42 was considered as worsened. Change from Baseline = difference between the score of physical component at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in the Mental Component Scores of SF-36 | The SF-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing :1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Scores on mental component were summed and averaged (range = 0 [worst]-100 [best]); increase from baseline indicated improvement. If participants' had shown change from baseline in mental health score >6.33, it was considered as improved; scores between -6.33 to 6.33 was considered unchanged, and score <-6.33 was considered as worsened. Change from Baseline = difference between the mental component score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| Mean Change From Baseline in the Genant-modified Sharp Joint Space Narrowing Score, Genant-modified Sharp Total Score, and Erosion Score | The Genant-modified Sharp scoring system assesses structural damage due to rheumatoid arthritis in radiographs. A score for erosions of 0-3.5 (8 gradations) is assigned for 14 joints in each hand and wrist, and 6 joints in each foot. Joint space narrowing scores of 0-4 (9 gradations) are assigned to 13 joints in each hand and 6 joints in each foot. The maximum erosion score is 40 x 3.5 = 140. The maximum joint space narrowing score is 38 x 4.0 = 152. Both the erosion and joint space narrowing scores are normalized to 145 and are added together for a maximum total Genant-modified Sharp score of 290. For all the three radiograph assessment, the minimum score is 0. A higher score indicates more damage and a negative change score indicates improvement. The change in score is to be calculated as: Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Weeks 24, 56, or 104 and the score at Baseline. | From Baseline (Day 1) to Weeks (W) 24, 56, and 104 |
| Percentage of Participants Without Erosive Progression | The Genant-modified Sharp scoring system assesses structural damage due to rheumatoid arthritis in radiographs. A score for erosions of 0-3.5 (8 gradations) is assigned for 14 joints in each hand and wrist, and 6 joints in each foot. The maximum erosion score is 40 x 3.5 = 140 which is normalized to 145. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 145. A higher score indicates more damage and negative change score indicates improvement. | Up to Week 104 |
| Mesa |
| Arizona |
| 85208 |
| United States |
| Paradise Valley | Arizona | 85253 | United States |
| Tucson | Arizona | 85724 | United States |
| Little Rock | Arkansas | 72205 | United States |
| Fullerton | California | 92835 | United States |
| La Jolla | California | 92037 | United States |
| Los Angeles | California | 90045 | United States |
| Los Angeles | California | 90048 | United States |
| Palo Alto | California | 94304 | United States |
| Pasadena | California | 91105 | United States |
| Rancho Mirage | California | 92270 | United States |
| Santa Maria | California | 93454 | United States |
| Upland | California | 91786 | United States |
| Danbury | Connecticut | 06810 | United States |
| Boca Raton | Florida | 33486 | United States |
| Delray Beach | Florida | 33484 | United States |
| Fort Lauderdale | Florida | 33334 | United States |
| Jupiter | Florida | 33458 | United States |
| Largo | Florida | 33773 | United States |
| Orlando | Florida | 32806 | United States |
| Boise | Idaho | 83702 | United States |
| Coeur d'Alene | Idaho | 83814 | United States |
| Meridian | Idaho | 83642 | United States |
| Chicago | Illinois | 60612 | United States |
| Chicago | Illinois | 60637 | United States |
| Indianapolis | Indiana | 46202-5149 | United States |
| Indianapolis | Indiana | 46260 | United States |
| Shreverport | Louisiana | 71103 | United States |
| Baltimore | Maryland | 21224 | United States |
| Boston | Massachusetts | 02215 | United States |
| Kalamazoo | Michigan | 49048 | United States |
| Lansing | Michigan | 48910 | United States |
| Rochester | Minnesota | 55905 | United States |
| St Louis | Missouri | 63110 | United States |
| St Louis | Missouri | 63141 | United States |
| Albany | New York | 12206 | United States |
| Manhasset | New York | 11030 | United States |
| New York | New York | 10003 | United States |
| Rochester | New York | 14618 | United States |
| Smithtown | New York | 11787 | United States |
| Chapel Hill | North Carolina | 27599-7600 | United States |
| Durham | North Carolina | 27710 | United States |
| Greenville | North Carolina | 27834 | United States |
| Cincinnati | Ohio | 45267-0563 | United States |
| Cleveland | Ohio | 44195 | United States |
| Dayton | Ohio | 45402 | United States |
| Mayfield | Ohio | 44143 | United States |
| Oklahoma City | Oklahoma | 73103 | United States |
| Oklahoma City | Oklahoma | 73109 | United States |
| Tulsa | Oklahoma | 74135 | United States |
| Duncansville | Pennsylvania | 16635 | United States |
| Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | 19140 | United States |
| Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | 19141 | United States |
| Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | 19152 | United States |
| Amarillo | Texas | 79124 | United States |
| Dallas | Texas | 75231 | United States |
| Dallas | Texas | 75246 | United States |
| Houston | Texas | 77074 | United States |
| Waco | Texas | 76708 | United States |
| Salt Lake City | Utah | 84132 | United States |
| Burlington | Vermont | 05401 | United States |
| Seattle | Washington | 98101 | United States |
| Seattle | Washington | 98104 | United States |
| Spokane | Washington | 99204 | United States |
| Madison | Wisconsin | 53717 | United States |
| Madison | Wisconsin | 53792 | United States |
| Brussels | 1070 | Belgium |
| Brussels | 1200 | Belgium |
| Ghent | 9000 | Belgium |
| Liège | 4000 | Belgium |
| Calgary | Alberta | T2N 4Z6 | Canada |
| Edmonton | Alberta | T6G 2S2 | Canada |
| Vancouver | British Columbia | V5Z 1L7 | Canada |
| Hamilton | Ontario | L8N 2B6 | Canada |
| London | Ontario | N6A 4V2 | Canada |
| Toronto | Ontario | M4N 3M5 | Canada |
| Toronto | Ontario | M5G 1X5 | Canada |
| Le Kremlin-Bicêtre | 94275 | France |
| Montpellier | 34295 | France |
| Paris | 75679 | France |
| Rouen | 76031 | France |
| Strasbourg | 67098 | France |
| Toulouse | 31059 | France |
| Tours | 37044 | France |
| Berlin | 10117 | Germany |
| Dresden | 01067 | Germany |
| Leipzig | 04103 | Germany |
| Ratingen | 40882 | Germany |
| Würzburg | 97080 | Germany |
| Cork | Ireland |
| Dublin | 4 | Ireland |
| Haifa | 3109601 | Israel |
| Haifa | 3339419 | Israel |
| Jerusalem | 9112001 | Israel |
| Petah Tikva | 4941492 | Israel |
| Ramat Gan | 5262000 | Israel |
| Tel Aviv | 6423906 | Israel |
| Udine | Friuli Venezia Giulia | 33100 | Italy |
| Arenzano | Liguria | 16011 | Italy |
| Genoa | Liguria | 16132 | Italy |
| Brescia | Lombardy | 25123 | Italy |
| Milan | Lombardy | 20157 | Italy |
| Pisa | Tuscany | 56100 | Italy |
| Amsterdam | 1105 AZ | Netherlands |
| Drammen | 3004 | Norway |
| Lillehammer | 2609 | Norway |
| Oslo | 0370 | Norway |
| Tromsø | 9038 | Norway |
| Cannock | WS11 5XY | United Kingdom |
| Leeds | LS7 4SA | United Kingdom |
| London | E11 1NR | United Kingdom |
| Manchester | M41 5SL | United Kingdom |
| Metropolitan Borough of Wirral | CH49 5PE | United Kingdom |
| Newcastle upon Tyne | NE7 7DN | United Kingdom |
| Keystone E, Burmester GR, Furie R, Loveless JE, Emery P, Kremer J, Tak PP, Broder MS, Yu E, Cravets M, Magrini F, Jost F. Improvement in patient-reported outcomes in a rituximab trial in patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis refractory to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Jun 15;59(6):785-93. doi: 10.1002/art.23715. |
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
| Week 24 to Week 104 Analysis |
|
|
Safety population included participants who were randomized and received any part of an infusion of the study drug.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Placebo Plus Methotrexate | Eligible participants were administered placebo by intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to 24 weeks and were followed up to Week 104. |
| BG001 | Rituximab Plus Methotrexate | Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Median | Full Range | years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Number of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20 Response at Week 24 | American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response is defined as >= 20% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both tender joint count (TJC)-68 joints and swollen joint count (SJC)-66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from score 0 (no pain) to 100 (unbearable pain); Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging score 0 (no disease activity) to 100 (maximum disease activity); Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do) for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either C-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). | Intent to treat (ITT) population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Number | participants | Week 24 |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With an ACR 50 Response at Week 24 | ACR 50 response is defined as a >= 50% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both TJC -68 joints and SJC -66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no pain to score '100'=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no disease activity to score '100'=maximum disease activity; HAQ : Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either CRP or ESR. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Number | participants | Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With ACR 70 Response at Week 24 | ACR 70 response is defined as a >= 70% improvement (reduction) in score compared with baseline for both TJC -68 joints and SJC -66 joints, as well as for 3 of the additional 5 ACR core set variables: Patient's Assessment of Pain over the previous 24 hours: using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no pain to score '100'=unbearable pain; Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity over the previous 24 hours using a VAS ranging from score '0'=no disease activity to score '100'=maximum disease activity; HAQ : Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ):which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst); and acute-phase reactant, either CRP or ESR. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Number | participants | Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Mean Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score of 28 Joints at Week 24 | The disease activity score (DAS28) is an evaluation index of rheumatoid arthritis. The DAS28 applies a mathematical formula based on the following parameters: 1. TJC-28 joints, 2. SJC -28 joints, 3. ESR or CRP measurement, 4. Participant's judgement on his own overall health (global health [GH]) status expressed by a VAS (0 [no disease activity] to 100 [maximum disease activity]). The mathematical formula is 0.56 × √28TJC + 0.28 × √28SJC + 0.7 x loge ESR + 0.014 × GH. The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10, where lower scores indicate best disease control and higher scores indicate worsening of disease. Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With DAS28 Low Disease Activity and DAS28 Remission at Week 24 | The DAS28 is an evaluation index of RA. The DAS28 applies a mathematical formula based on the following parameters: 1. TJC- 28 joints, 2. SJC- 28 joints, 3. ESR or CRP measurement, 4. Participant's judgement on his own overall health status (GH) expressed by a visual analogue scale VAS (0 [no disease activity] to 100 [maximum disease activity]). The mathematical formula is 0.56 × √28TJC + 0.28 × √28SJC + 0.7 x loge ESR + 0.014 × GH. The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10. A participant was categorized as having low disease activity, if participant's DAS28 score was <= 3.2, and was categorized as having clinical remission if participant's DAS28 score was < 2.6. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Good, Moderate, or no European League Against Rheumatism Responses at Week 24 | European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response is defined based on the DAS28 score and the EULAR response criteria (Van Gestel et al, 1996 and 1999). The DAS28 scale ranges from score of 0 to 10, where lower scores indicate best disease control and higher scores indicate worsening of disease. At a given visit, participants with a DAS28 score of < 3.2 are considered good responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is >1.2. Participants with a DAS28 score >= 3.2 to 5.1 are considered moderate responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is <=1.2 to >=0.6. Participants with DAS28 score >5.1 are considered non-responders if the change from baseline in their DAS28 score is <=1.2 to >=0.6. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Number | participants | Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage Change From Baseline in the ACR Core Set (SJC, TJC, Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments, Health Assessment Questionnaire, Pain, C-Reactive Protein, and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) Score | Percentage change in the scores of the following parameters of ACR core set relative to respective baseline scores in both study arms was analyzed : SJC (28 and 66 joints) and TJC (28 and 66 joints), patient's global assessment and physician's global assessment based on disease activity (both are expressed by VAS [0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity]), HAQ (based on HAQ disability index [HAQDI]) which included 8 domains (dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip; common daily activities) rated on a 4-point scale (0=without any difficulty to 3=unable to do), where the sum of scores was divided by the number of domains with a score for a total possible score of 0 (best) to 3 (worst), pain assessment using a VAS ranging from score 0 (no pain) to 100 (unbearable pain), CRP concentration, and ESR. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | percent change | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Mean Change From Baseline of Short Form 36 Total Scores at Week 24 | The Short Form (SF)-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Transforming and standardizing these domains leads to the calculation of the physical component summary and mental component summary measures. Scores on each item were summed and averaged (range 0 [worst] to 100 [best]); increase in score from baseline indicated improvement. Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants with available data at the time of evaluation were analyzed. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Categorical Change From Baseline in the Physical Component Scores of SF-36 | The SF-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing :1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Scores on physical component were summed and averaged (range 0 [worst] to 100 [best]); If participants' had shown change from baseline in physical health component score >5.42, it was considered as improved; score between -5.42 to 5.42 was considered as unchanged, and score < -5.42 was considered as worsened. Change from Baseline = difference between the score of physical component at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants with available data at the time of evaluation were analyzed. | Posted | Number | participants | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in the Mental Component Scores of SF-36 | The SF-36 determined participants' overall quality of life by assessing :1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual daily activities because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems since last month; 7) limitations in usual work (house hold and outside) due to emotional problems 8) current and 1 year past status of health 9) general mental health. Scores on mental component were summed and averaged (range = 0 [worst]-100 [best]); increase from baseline indicated improvement. If participants' had shown change from baseline in mental health score >6.33, it was considered as improved; scores between -6.33 to 6.33 was considered unchanged, and score <-6.33 was considered as worsened. Change from Baseline = difference between the mental component score at Week 24 and the score at Baseline. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants with available data at the time of evaluation were analyzed. | Posted | Number | participants | From Baseline (Day 1) to Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Mean Change From Baseline in the Genant-modified Sharp Joint Space Narrowing Score, Genant-modified Sharp Total Score, and Erosion Score | The Genant-modified Sharp scoring system assesses structural damage due to rheumatoid arthritis in radiographs. A score for erosions of 0-3.5 (8 gradations) is assigned for 14 joints in each hand and wrist, and 6 joints in each foot. Joint space narrowing scores of 0-4 (9 gradations) are assigned to 13 joints in each hand and 6 joints in each foot. The maximum erosion score is 40 x 3.5 = 140. The maximum joint space narrowing score is 38 x 4.0 = 152. Both the erosion and joint space narrowing scores are normalized to 145 and are added together for a maximum total Genant-modified Sharp score of 290. For all the three radiograph assessment, the minimum score is 0. A higher score indicates more damage and a negative change score indicates improvement. The change in score is to be calculated as: Change from Baseline = difference between the score at Weeks 24, 56, or 104 and the score at Baseline. | The ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study drug. Participants whom treatment allocation was unblinded and who received treatment prior to randomization were excluded. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | units on a scale | From Baseline (Day 1) to Weeks (W) 24, 56, and 104 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Without Erosive Progression | The Genant-modified Sharp scoring system assesses structural damage due to rheumatoid arthritis in radiographs. A score for erosions of 0-3.5 (8 gradations) is assigned for 14 joints in each hand and wrist, and 6 joints in each foot. The maximum erosion score is 40 x 3.5 = 140 which is normalized to 145. The minimum score is 0 and the maximum score is 145. A higher score indicates more damage and negative change score indicates improvement. | ITT population included all randomized participants who received any part of an infusion of study medication. Participants with available data at the time of evaluation were analyzed. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Up to Week 104 |
|
Up to Week 104
Adverse events were captured in safety analysis population. Safety population included participants who were randomized and received any part of an infusion of the study drug.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Placebo Plus Methotrexate | Eligible participants were administered placebo by intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to 24 weeks and were followed up to Week 104. | 26 | 208 | 152 | 208 | ||
| EG001 | Rituximab Plus Methotrexate | Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. | 50 | 308 | 225 | 308 |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rheumatoid arthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Osteoarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Arthralgia | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bursitis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cervical spinal stenosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intervertebral disc degeneration | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intervertebral disc protrusion | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Monarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neck pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Polyarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonia | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cellulitis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diverticulitis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Escherichia urinary tract infection | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abscess intestinal | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bronchitis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cellulitis gangrenous | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Device related infection | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Empyema | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Erysipelas | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastroenteritis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastroenteritis viral | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hepatitis B | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Infection | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Influenza | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Meningitis viral | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyelonephritis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Sepsis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Zoonosis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Myocardial infarction | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Angina pectoris | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Angina unstable | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Atrial fibrillation | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Atrioventricular block complete | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac arrest | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac failure | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac tamponade | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiomyopathy | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pericarditis | Cardiac disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Deep vein thrombosis | Vascular disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypertension | Vascular disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Vasculitis | Vascular disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diarrhoea | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric ulcer | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastrointestinal haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastrooesophageal reflux disease | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nausea | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pancreatitis | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Vomiting | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pleurisy | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Interstitial lung disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Mediastinal mass | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pleuritic pain | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Breast cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intestinal adenocarcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pancreatic carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Prostate cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Syncope | Nervous system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cerebrovascular accident | Nervous system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Spinal cord compression | Nervous system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Transient ischaemic attack | Nervous system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Fall | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Joint dislocation | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Tibia fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abortion spontaneous | Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pregnancy | Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Anaemia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lymphadenopathy | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chest pain | General disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyrexia | General disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hyperkalaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Type 2 diabetes mellitus | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Confusional state | Psychiatric disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Suicide attempt | Psychiatric disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute prerenal failure | Renal and urinary disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Renal failure chronic | Renal and urinary disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin ulcer | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Subcutaneous nodule | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Anaphylactic reaction | Immune system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| International normalised ratio increased | Investigations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Synovectomy | Surgical and medical procedures | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rheumatoid Arthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Arthralgia | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Back Pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Upper Respiratory Tract infection | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nasopharyngitis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bronchitis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urinary Tract Infection | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Sinusitis | Infections and infestations | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Headache | Nervous system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dizziness | Nervous system disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diarrhoea | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nausea | Gastrointestinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Fatigue | General disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyrexia | General disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypertension | Vascular disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Insomnia | Psychiatric disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rash | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cough | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | 15.1 | Systematic Assessment |
|
The Study being conducted under this Agreement is part of the Overall Study. Investigator is free to publish in reputable journals or to present at professional conferences the results of the Study, but only after the first publication or presentation that involves the Overall Study. The Sponsor may request that Confidential Information be deleted and/or the publication be postponed in order to protect the Sponsor's intellectual property rights
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roche Trial Information Hotline | F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG | +41 616878333 | global.trial_information@roche.com |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001172 | Arthritis, Rheumatoid |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001168 | Arthritis |
| D007592 | Joint Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
| D012216 | Rheumatic Diseases |
| D003240 | Connective Tissue Diseases |
| D017437 | Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases |
| D001327 | Autoimmune Diseases |
| D007154 | Immune System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D000069283 | Rituximab |
| D008727 | Methotrexate |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D058846 | Antibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-Derived |
| D000911 | Antibodies, Monoclonal |
| D000906 | Antibodies |
| D007136 | Immunoglobulins |
| D007162 | Immunoproteins |
| D001798 | Blood Proteins |
| D011506 | Proteins |
| D000602 | Amino Acids, Peptides, and Proteins |
| D012712 | Serum Globulins |
| D005916 | Globulins |
| D000630 | Aminopterin |
| D011622 | Pterins |
| D011621 | Pteridines |
| D006574 | Heterocyclic Compounds, 2-Ring |
| D000072471 | Heterocyclic Compounds, Fused-Ring |
| D006571 | Heterocyclic Compounds |
Not provided
Not provided
| Lack of Efficacy |
|
| Protocol Violation |
|
| Refused treatment |
|
| Failure to return |
|
| Movement into re-treatment study |
|
| Other |
|
| Male |
|
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
|
|
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| OG001 |
| Rituximab Plus Methotrexate |
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
|
|
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
|
|
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
|
|
| Rituximab Plus Methotrexate |
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 |
| Rituximab Plus Methotrexate |
Eligible Participants were administered rituximab 1000 mg as intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15 along with MTX 10-25 mg p.o. or parenterally once a week up to Week 24 and were followed up to Week 104. |
|
|
| Units |
|---|
| Counts |
|---|
| Participants |
|
|