Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada | OTHER |
A Canadian study to evaluate early use of adalimumab after methotrexate failure in early rheumatoid arthritis. The study hypothesis will verify if adalimumab effectively reduces joint damage in more participants when introduced earlier than in current practice.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Early Adalimumab | Experimental | Participants in the Early Adalimumab arm will receive adalimumab and methotrexate at Baseline and every other week for study duration. |
|
| Standard of Care | Active Comparator | Participants in the Standard of Care arm will receive methotrexate and other disease modifying antirheumatic drugs as per local treatment guidelines and study doctor's judgement. Adalimumab may be initiated after a minimum of 6 months. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| adalimumab | Biological | Study drug will be provided to participants in Early Adalimumab arm as a sterile, preservative-free solution for subcutaneous injection, contained in a pre-filled syringe housed in a pen device (pre-filled pen). 40 mg of adalimumab will be administered subcutaneously at Baseline and then every other week for 24 months. Adalimumab may be initiated in participants in standard of care (SOC) arm after a minimum of 6 months of treatment recommended by their study doctor. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With No Radiographic Progression at Month 12 | Radiographic progression was defined as change from Baseline in the modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) of ≤ 0.5 units). The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. | Baseline, Month 12 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With No Radiographic Progression at Month 6 and Month 24 | Radiographic progression was defined as change from Baseline in the modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) of ≤ 0.5 units). The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Christina Pelizon, MD | AbbVie Corporation | Study Director |
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Related Info | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Standard of Care | Participants received methotrexate and other disease modifying antirheumatic drugs as per local treatment guidelines and study doctor's judgement. Adalimumab may have been initiated after a minimum of 6 months. |
| FG001 | Early Adalimumab | Participants received 40 mg of adalimumab administered subcutaneously at Baseline and then every other week for 24 months. Participants received a methotrexate regimen based on local guidelines and their study doctor's judgment. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Standard of Care | Participants received methotrexate and other disease modifying antirheumatic drugs as per local treatment guidelines and study doctor's judgement. Adalimumab may have been initiated after a minimum of 6 months. |
| BG001 | Early Adalimumab |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| 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 | Percentage of Participants With No Radiographic Progression at Month 12 | Radiographic progression was defined as change from Baseline in the modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) of ≤ 0.5 units). The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. Last observation carried forward (LOCF): missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Baseline, Month 12 |
|
Baseline through Month 24 (± 10 days) plus 70 days follow-up.
Not provided
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 | Standard of Care | Participants received methotrexate and other disease modifying antirheumatic drugs as per local treatment guidelines and study doctor's judgement. Adalimumab may have been initiated after a minimum of 6 months. |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANAEMIA | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Global Medical Information | AbbVie | 800-633-9110 |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001172 | Arthritis, Rheumatoid |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001168 | Arthritis |
| D007592 | Joint Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
| D012216 | Rheumatic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D000068879 | Adalimumab |
| D008727 | Methotrexate |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D061067 | Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized |
| D000911 | Antibodies, Monoclonal |
| D000906 | Antibodies |
| D007136 | Immunoglobulins |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
|
| Methotrexate | Drug | Participants in both arms will receive a methotrexate regimen based on local guidelines and their study doctor's judgment. |
|
|
| Baseline, Month 6, Month 24 |
| Change From Baseline in mTSS at Months 6, 12 and 24 | The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. | Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With Rapid Radiographic Progression at Month 12 | Radiographic progression was defined as a change from Baseline in mTSS that is ≥ 5 units. The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. | Month 12 |
| Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A participant is an ACR20 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
| Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A participant is an ACR50 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
| Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A participant is an ACR70 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
| Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count 66 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Sixty-six joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of swelling is scored 1 and no swelling is 0; range of score is 0-66, with higher scores indicating more swollen joints. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count 28 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of swelling is scored 1 and no swelling is 0; range of score is 0-28, with higher scores indicating more swollen joints. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count 68 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Sixty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of tenderness is scored 1 and no tenderness is 0; range of score is 0-68, with higher scores indicating more tender joints. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count 28 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of tenderness is scored 1 and no tenderness is 0; range of score is 0-28, with higher scores indicating more tender joints. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Physicians were asked to indicate the participant's disease activity (independent of the participant's self assessment) on a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (very good) to 100 (very bad). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Participants were asked to indicate how they were doing with their RA on a VAS from 0 (very well) to 100 (very poorly). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Pain at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Participants were asked to indicate how severe their pain had been in the previous week on a VAS from 0 (no pain) to 100 (pain as bad as it could be). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in CRP at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score DAS28(CRP) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With DAS28(CRP) Remission at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | DAS28(CRP) remission was defined as DAS28(CRP) < 2.6. The DAS28(CRP) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With DAS28(CRP) Low Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | DAS28(CRP) low disease activity was defined as DAS28(CRP) < 3.2. The DAS28(CRP) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS28 score. The DAS28 score ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more disease activity. A Good EULAR Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of ≥ 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 3.2. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With EULAR Moderate Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS28 score. The DAS28 score ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more disease activity. A Moderate EULAR Response is defined as either: an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of > 0.6 and < 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 5.1; or an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of ≥ 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of > 3.2. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With Flare-Up After Remission by Month 24 | Percentage of participants with a flare-up after remission by Month 24, defined as participants who reached remission (DAS28 < 2.6) but later had two consecutive visits with DAS28 ≥ 2.6 (based on observed cases only). The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Month 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. A lower HAQ-DI score is better. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving Minimal Clinical Important Difference (MCID) in HAQ at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The percentage of participants achieving MCID in HAQ, defined as a 0.22 unit decrease in HAQ. HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. A lower HAQ-DI score is better. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving HAQ < 0.5 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The percentage of participants achieving HAQ < 0.5. HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. HAQ remission indicating normal physical function is defined by HAQ-DI < 0.5. A lower HAQ-DI score is better. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue Scale at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire is a self-administered patient questionnaire that consists of 13 questions designed to measure the degree of fatigue experienced by participants in the previous 7 days. Participants respond to the questions on a scale from 'not at all' (0) to 'very much' (4). The scale score is computed by summing the item scores, after reversing those items that are worded in the negative direction. The FACIT-Fatigue subscale score ranges from 0 to 52, where higher scores represent less fatigue. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving MCID in FACIT-Fatigue Scale at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire is a self-administered patient questionnaire that consists of 13 questions designed to measure the degree of fatigue experienced by participants in the previous 7 days. Participants respond to the questions on a scale from 'not at all' (0) to 'very much' (4). The scale score is computed by summing the item scores, after reversing those items that are worded in the negative direction. The FACIT-Fatigue subscale score ranges from 0 to 52, where higher scores represent less fatigue. The MCID was defined as a 3.56-unit decrease in FACIT-Fatigue Scale. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The WLQ was used to measure the impairment in work-related productivity, with reference to the previous two weeks. Each work-related question is scored from 0 to 4 and the total score ranges from 0-100, with lower scores signifying fewer limitations at work. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in EuroQOL Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Index Score at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.594 to 1 (with higher scores indicating better health state). | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in EQ-5D VAS at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | BDI is a 21-item questionnaire, participant self-report rating inventory that measures characteristic attitudes and symptoms of depression. The range of scores is 0 to 63, with a higher value representing a worse outcome. | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Likert Scale for Participant's Satisfaction With Care at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Participants measured their satisfaction with care by specifying their in response to the question "How satisfied are you with the results of your RA treatment?" on a 5-point Likert scale, from the following 5 answers: not satisfied, a little satisfied, moderately satisfied, well satisfied, very well satisfied. Scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating more satisfaction with their care. | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
| Health Care Resources Questionnaire (HCR): Medical Insurance at Baseline | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked whether and what type of health insurance they had. Types of Canadian insurance included: Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ); Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ); Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST); Canadian Health Insurance Program (CHIP); and L'indemnisation des victimes d'actes criminals (IVAC). | Baseline |
| HCR: Medical Insurance at Final Visit | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked whether and what type of health insurance they had. Types of Canadian insurance included: Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ); Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ); Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST); Canadian Health Insurance Program (CHIP); and L'indemnisation des victimes d'actes criminals (IVAC). | Final Visit (up to Month 24) |
| HCR: Health Care for RA in the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked about their use of health care for RA in the past 4 weeks. | Baseline |
| HCR: Health Care for RA in the Past 4 Weeks at Final Visit | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked about their use of health care for RA in the past 4 weeks. | Final Visit (up to Month 24) |
| HCR: Out of Pocket Expenses Incurred for the Current Study Condition in the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked what type of out-of-pocket expenses they had incurred for their RA in the past 4 weeks. Based on Canadian dollars. | Baseline |
| HCR: Out of Pocket Expenses Incurred for the Current Study Condition in the Past 4 Weeks at Final Visit | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked what type of out-of-pocket expenses they had incurred for their RA in the past 4 weeks. Based on Canadian dollars. | Final Visit (up to Month 24) |
| Lost to Follow-up |
|
| Lack of Efficacy |
|
| Other |
|
Participants received 40 mg of adalimumab administered subcutaneously at Baseline and then every other week for 24 months. Participants received a methotrexate regimen based on local guidelines and their study doctor's judgment. |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| years |
|
| Age, Customized | Number | participants |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Title |
|---|
| Description |
|---|
| OG000 | Standard of Care | Participants received methotrexate and other disease modifying antirheumatic drugs as per local treatment guidelines and study doctor's judgement. Adalimumab may have been initiated after a minimum of 6 months. |
| OG001 | Early Adalimumab | Participants received 40 mg of adalimumab administered subcutaneously at Baseline and then every other week for 24 months. Participants received a methotrexate regimen based on local guidelines and their study doctor's judgment. |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With No Radiographic Progression at Month 6 and Month 24 | Radiographic progression was defined as change from Baseline in the modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) of ≤ 0.5 units). The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Baseline, Month 6, Month 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in mTSS at Months 6, 12 and 24 | The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug; n=number of participants with an assessment at Baseline and given timepoint (observed cases). | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Rapid Radiographic Progression at Month 12 | Radiographic progression was defined as a change from Baseline in mTSS that is ≥ 5 units. The mTSS is a measure of change in joint health: digitized images of radiographs of hands and feet obtained at Screening and Month 12 were scored in a blinded manner. Joints were scored for erosions on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 5 (complete collapse) and joint space narrowing on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 4 (ankylosis or complete dislocation). Erosion scores and narrowing scores were added to obtain the mTSS (range = 0 [normal] to 398 [maximal disease]). An increase in mTSS from Baseline represents disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represents halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug ith an assessment (nonresponder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Month 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A participant is an ACR20 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
| Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A participant is an ACR50 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
| Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A participant is an ACR70 responder if the following 3 criteria for improvement from Baseline are met:
| Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug (nonresponder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count 66 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Sixty-six joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of swelling is scored 1 and no swelling is 0; range of score is 0-66, with higher scores indicating more swollen joints. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | swollen joints | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Swollen Joint Count 28 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of swelling is scored 1 and no swelling is 0; range of score is 0-28, with higher scores indicating more swollen joints. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | swollen joints | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count 68 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Sixty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of tenderness is scored 1 and no tenderness is 0; range of score is 0-68, with higher scores indicating more tender joints. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | tender joints | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Tender Joint Count 28 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Twenty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The presence of tenderness is scored 1 and no tenderness is 0; range of score is 0-28, with higher scores indicating more tender joints. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | tender joints | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Physicians were asked to indicate the participant's disease activity (independent of the participant's self assessment) on a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (very good) to 100 (very bad). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Participants were asked to indicate how they were doing with their RA on a VAS from 0 (very well) to 100 (very poorly). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Pain at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Participants were asked to indicate how severe their pain had been in the previous week on a VAS from 0 (no pain) to 100 (pain as bad as it could be). A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in CRP at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | mg/L | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score DAS28(CRP) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With DAS28(CRP) Remission at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | DAS28(CRP) remission was defined as DAS28(CRP) < 2.6. The DAS28(CRP) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With DAS28(CRP) Low Disease Activity at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | DAS28(CRP) low disease activity was defined as DAS28(CRP) < 3.2. The DAS28(CRP) is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS28 score. The DAS28 score ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more disease activity. A Good EULAR Response is defined as an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of ≥ 1.2 compared with Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 3.2. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With EULAR Moderate Response at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | A EULAR response reflects an improvement in disease activity and an attainment of a lower degree of disease activity based on the DAS28 score. The DAS28 score ranges from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more disease activity. A Moderate EULAR Response is defined as either: an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of > 0.6 and < 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of ≤ 5.1; or an improvement (decrease) in the DAS28 of ≥ 1.2 from Baseline and attainment of a DAS28 score of > 3.2. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Flare-Up After Remission by Month 24 | Percentage of participants with a flare-up after remission by Month 24, defined as participants who reached remission (DAS28 < 2.6) but later had two consecutive visits with DAS28 ≥ 2.6 (based on observed cases only). The DAS28 is a validated index of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity. Twenty-eight tender joint counts, 28 swollen joint counts, CRP, and general health are included in the DAS28 score. Scores on the DAS28 range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher disease activity. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Month 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. A lower HAQ-DI score is better. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving Minimal Clinical Important Difference (MCID) in HAQ at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The percentage of participants achieving MCID in HAQ, defined as a 0.22 unit decrease in HAQ. HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. A lower HAQ-DI score is better. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving HAQ < 0.5 at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The percentage of participants achieving HAQ < 0.5. HAQ is a participant-reported questionnaire specific for rheumatoid arthritis. It consists of 20 questions referring to eight domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and daily activities. Participants assessed their ability to do each task over the past week using the following response categories: without any difficulty (0); with some difficulty (1); with much difficulty (2); and unable to do (3). Scores on each task were summed and averaged to provide an overall score ranging from 0 to 3, where zero represents no disability and three very severe, high-dependency disability. HAQ remission indicating normal physical function is defined by HAQ-DI < 0.5. A lower HAQ-DI score is better. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue Scale at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire is a self-administered patient questionnaire that consists of 13 questions designed to measure the degree of fatigue experienced by participants in the previous 7 days. Participants respond to the questions on a scale from 'not at all' (0) to 'very much' (4). The scale score is computed by summing the item scores, after reversing those items that are worded in the negative direction. The FACIT-Fatigue subscale score ranges from 0 to 52, where higher scores represent less fatigue. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving MCID in FACIT-Fatigue Scale at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire is a self-administered patient questionnaire that consists of 13 questions designed to measure the degree of fatigue experienced by participants in the previous 7 days. Participants respond to the questions on a scale from 'not at all' (0) to 'very much' (4). The scale score is computed by summing the item scores, after reversing those items that are worded in the negative direction. The FACIT-Fatigue subscale score ranges from 0 to 52, where higher scores represent less fatigue. The MCID was defined as a 3.56-unit decrease in FACIT-Fatigue Scale. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug with an assessment (non-responder imputation). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The WLQ was used to measure the impairment in work-related productivity, with reference to the previous two weeks. Each work-related question is scored from 0 to 4 and the total score ranges from 0-100, with lower scores signifying fewer limitations at work. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in EuroQOL Questionnaire (EQ-5D) Index Score at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The EQ-5D is a participant answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that essentially attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.594 to 1 (with higher scores indicating better health state). | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation; n=number of participants with an assessment at given time point. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in EQ-5D VAS at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | The EQ-5D VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a scale from 0-100 where 100 is the 'best imaginable health state' and 0 is the 'worst imaginable health state.' | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | BDI is a 21-item questionnaire, participant self-report rating inventory that measures characteristic attitudes and symptoms of depression. The range of scores is 0 to 63, with a higher value representing a worse outcome. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Likert Scale for Participant's Satisfaction With Care at Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 | Participants measured their satisfaction with care by specifying their in response to the question "How satisfied are you with the results of your RA treatment?" on a 5-point Likert scale, from the following 5 answers: not satisfied, a little satisfied, moderately satisfied, well satisfied, very well satisfied. Scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating more satisfaction with their care. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized and received at least one dose of study drug and had an assessment. LOCF: missing responses were imputed by carrying forward the last non-missing post-baseline observation. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Health Care Resources Questionnaire (HCR): Medical Insurance at Baseline | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked whether and what type of health insurance they had. Types of Canadian insurance included: Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ); Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ); Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST); Canadian Health Insurance Program (CHIP); and L'indemnisation des victimes d'actes criminals (IVAC). | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=25, 28 is the number of participants who answered that they did have health insurance). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Baseline |
|
|
|
| Secondary | HCR: Medical Insurance at Final Visit | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked whether and what type of health insurance they had. Types of Canadian insurance included: Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ); Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ); Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST); Canadian Health Insurance Program (CHIP); and L'indemnisation des victimes d'actes criminals (IVAC). | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=26, 26 is the number of participants who answered that they did have health insurance). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Final Visit (up to Month 24) |
|
|
|
| Secondary | HCR: Health Care for RA in the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked about their use of health care for RA in the past 4 weeks. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=11, 10 is the number of participants who stated that they had used healthcare for RA in the past 4 weeks). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Baseline |
|
|
|
| Secondary | HCR: Health Care for RA in the Past 4 Weeks at Final Visit | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked about their use of health care for RA in the past 4 weeks. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=the number of participants included in the percentage calculation (n=2, 3 is the number of participants who stated that they had used healthcare for RA in the past 4 weeks). | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Final Visit (up to Month 24) |
|
|
|
| Secondary | HCR: Out of Pocket Expenses Incurred for the Current Study Condition in the Past 4 Weeks at Baseline | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked what type of out-of-pocket expenses they had incurred for their RA in the past 4 weeks. Based on Canadian dollars. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=participants with non-zero expenses for given category, and included in the mean (SD) calculation. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Canadian dollars | Baseline |
|
|
|
| Secondary | HCR: Out of Pocket Expenses Incurred for the Current Study Condition in the Past 4 Weeks at Final Visit | The HCR consists of four aspects: medical insurance, health care for RA in the past 4 weeks, hospitalization in the past 4 weeks, and out of pocket expenses incurred for the current study condition. Participants were asked what type of out-of-pocket expenses they had incurred for their RA in the past 4 weeks. Based on Canadian dollars. | Intent-to-treat population: all participants who were randomized, received at least one dose of study drug, and had an assessment. n=participants with non-zero expenses for given category, and included in the mean (SD) calculation. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Canadian dollars | Final Visit (up to Month 24) |
|
|
|
| 3 |
| 35 |
| 32 |
| 35 |
| EG001 | Early Adalimumab | Participants received 40 mg of adalimumab administered subcutaneously at Baseline and then every other week for 24 months. Participants received a methotrexate regimen based on local guidelines and their study doctor's judgment. | 4 | 39 | 33 | 39 |
| SURGICAL FAILURE | General disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| HERPES ZOSTER | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ACUTE MYELOID LEUKAEMIA | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| BREAST CANCER | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| LUNG NEOPLASM MALIGNANT | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| PSYCHOTIC DISORDER | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| PALPITATIONS | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DRY EYE | Eye disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| VISION BLURRED | Eye disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| VITREOUS FLOATERS | Eye disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DIARRHOEA | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DYSPEPSIA | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| GASTROOESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| MOUTH ULCERATION | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| NAUSEA | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| VOMITING | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| CHEST PAIN | General disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| CYST | General disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| FATIGUE | General disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| INJECTION SITE REACTION | General disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DRUG HYPERSENSITIVITY | Immune system disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| CYSTITIS | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| HERPES ZOSTER | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| INFLUENZA | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| LOWER RESPIRATORY TRACT INFECTION | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| NASOPHARYNGITIS | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ORAL CANDIDIASIS | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| RESPIRATORY TRACT INFECTION | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| SINUSITIS | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| UPPER RESPIRATORY TRACT INFECTION | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ALANINE AMINOTRANSFERASE INCREASED | Investigations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ASPARTATE AMINOTRANSFERASE INCREASED | Investigations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| BLOOD CHOLESTEROL INCREASED | Investigations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| BLOOD GLUCOSE INCREASED | Investigations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| BLOOD TRIGLYCERIDES INCREASED | Investigations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| HEPATIC ENZYME INCREASED | Investigations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| WEIGHT DECREASED | Investigations | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ARTHRALGIA | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| BACK PAIN | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| JOINT SWELLING | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| MUSCLE SPASMS | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| PAIN IN EXTREMITY | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| TENDONITIS | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| AMNESIA | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DIZZINESS | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| HEADACHE | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ANXIETY | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DEPRESSION | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| INSOMNIA | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| COUGH | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DYSPNOEA | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| OROPHARYNGEAL PAIN | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ACNE | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ALOPECIA | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| DRY SKIN | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ECCHYMOSIS | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| ECZEMA | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| RASH | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| RASH PAPULAR | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| HOT FLUSH | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| HYPERTENSION | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 18.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
AbbVie requests that any investigator or institution that plans on presenting/publishing results disclosure, provide written notification of their request 60 days prior to their presentation/publication. AbbVie requests that no presentation/publication will be instituted until 12 months after a study is completed, or after the first presentation/publication whichever occurs first. A delay may be proposed of a presentation/publication if AbbVie needs to secure patent or proprietary protection.
| D003240 |
| Connective Tissue Diseases |
| D017437 | Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases |
| D001327 | Autoimmune Diseases |
| D007154 | Immune System Diseases |
| 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 |
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.650 |
| Difference in percentage |
| -5.3 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -28.1 |
| 17.5 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 24; n=28, 21 |
|
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P= 0.05. | 0.033 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -1.46 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.667 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.79 | -0.12 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.120 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.22 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.403 | 2-Sided | 95 | -5.05 | 0.60 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.021 |
The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. |
| Difference in percentage |
| 27.0 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| 4.98 |
| 48.93 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.552 | Difference in percentage | 6.7 | 2-Sided | 95 | -15.29 | 28.63 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.281 | Difference in percentage | -12.2 | 2-Sided | 95 | -34.04 | 9.72 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.209 | Difference in percentage | -14.4 | 2-Sided | 95 | -36.64 | 7.78 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.091 | Difference in percentage | -19.6 | 2-Sided | 95 | -41.74 | 2.62 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.060 |
| Difference in percentage |
| 20.7 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -0.14 |
| 41.61 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.451 | Difference in percentage | 8.7 | 2-Sided | 95 | -13.85 | 31.29 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.413 | Difference in percentage | 9.3 | 2-Sided | 95 | -12.82 | 31.43 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.528 | Difference in percentage | -7.3 | 2-Sided | 95 | -29.74 | 15.23 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.399 | Difference in percentage | -9.5 | 2-Sided | 95 | -31.61 | 12.56 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.031 |
The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. |
| Difference in percentage |
| 19.6 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| 2.74 |
| 36.53 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.780 | Difference in percentage | 2.8 | 2-Sided | 95 | -16.74 | 22.31 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.092 | Difference in percentage | 16.5 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.07 | 35.04 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.290 | Difference in percentage | 10.8 | 2-Sided | 95 | -8.86 | 30.40 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.116 | Difference in percentage | -16.9 | 2-Sided | 95 | -37.86 | 4.01 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Month 6 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.001. | <0.001 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -4.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.12 | 2-Sided | 95 | -6.8 | -2.3 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. | 0.021 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.16 | 2-Sided | 95 | -5.1 | -0.4 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. | 0.037 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.96 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.0 | -0.1 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.702 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.58 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.7 | 2.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.644 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.15 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.8 | 1.8 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Month 6 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.001. | <0.001 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -3.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.79 | 2-Sided | 95 | -5.0 | -1.8 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.01. | 0.008 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.2 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.81 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.8 | -0.6 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. | 0.028 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -1.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.71 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.0 | -0.2 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.452 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.94 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.6 | 1.2 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.343 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.77 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.3 | 0.8 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.001. |
| <0.001 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -7.2 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 1.92 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -11.0 |
| -3.3 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. | 0.050 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -3.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.87 | 2-Sided | 95 | -7.5 | 0.0 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.725 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.95 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.6 | 3.2 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.837 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.31 | 2-Sided | 95 | -5.1 | 4.1 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.661 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.8 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.83 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.5 | 2.9 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.001. |
| <0.001 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -4.0 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 1.08 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -6.1 |
| -1.9 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. | 0.040 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.19 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.9 | -0.1 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.492 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.8 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.14 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.1 | 1.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.649 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.30 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.2 | 2.0 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.464 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.8 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.11 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.0 | 1.4 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Month 6 | ANCOVA | The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.001. | <0.001 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -25.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.90 | 2-Sided | 95 | -37.3 | -13.7 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.113 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -9.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.84 | 2-Sided | 95 | -21.0 | 2.3 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.544 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -3.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.72 | 2-Sided | 95 | -14.9 | 7.9 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.916 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.96 | 2-Sided | 95 | -12.5 | 11.2 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.983 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.86 | 2-Sided | 95 | -11.8 | 11.6 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.358 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -5.2 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 5.61 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -16.4 |
| 6.0 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.352 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 5.2 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.58 | 2-Sided | 95 | -5.9 | 16.4 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.990 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.28 | 2-Sided | 95 | -10.5 | 10.6 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.238 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 6.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.36 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.3 | 17.1 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.207 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 7.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.54 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.0 | 18.1 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.129 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -8.4 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 5.49 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -19.4 |
| 2.5 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.937 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.62 | 2-Sided | 95 | -10.8 | 11.6 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.670 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.59 | 2-Sided | 95 | -13.5 | 8.8 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.341 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 5.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.67 | 2-Sided | 95 | -5.9 | 16.7 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.621 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 3.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 6.13 | 2-Sided | 95 | -9.2 | 15.3 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9; n=35, 38 |
|
| Month 12; n=35, 38 |
|
| Month 18; n=35, 38 |
|
| Month 24; n=26, 23 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.744 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -1.5 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 4.51 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -10.5 |
| 7.5 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.967 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.2 | Standard Error of the Mean | 3.95 | 2-Sided | 95 | -7.7 | 8.0 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.377 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 2.9 | Standard Error of the Mean | 3.30 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.7 | 9.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.122 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 5.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 3.50 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.5 | 12.4 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.490 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 2.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 3.42 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.4 | 9.2 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9; n=35, 38 |
|
| Month 12; n=35, 38 |
|
| Month 18; n=35, 38 |
|
| Month 24; n=35, 38 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.01. |
| 0.003 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -0.9 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 0.29 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -1.5 |
| -0.3 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.214 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.29 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.9 | 0.2 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.339 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.3 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.27 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.8 | 0.3 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.973 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.30 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.6 | 0.6 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.755 | P-values are two-sided and are based on repeated measures ANCOVA model with treatment group and visit as the fixed effects and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.28 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.6 | 0.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. |
| 0.014 |
| Difference in percentage |
| 24.5 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| 6.09 |
| 42.85 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.762 | Difference in percentage | -3.2 | 2-Sided | 95 | -24.10 | 17.66 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.220 | Difference in percentage | 13.0 | 2-Sided | 95 | -7.46 | 33.54 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.747 | Difference in percentage | -3.5 | 2-Sided | 95 | -24.90 | 17.86 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.701 | Difference in percentage | -4.4 | 2-Sided | 95 | -26.80 | 18.01 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.05. |
| 0.047 |
| Difference in percentage |
| 22.7 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| 1.03 |
| 44.39 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.668 | Difference in percentage | 5.0 | 2-Sided | 95 | -17.74 | 27.71 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.500 | Difference in percentage | 7.8 | 2-Sided | 95 | -14.88 | 30.56 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.816 | Difference in percentage | -2.7 | 2-Sided | 95 | -25.52 | 20.10 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.358 | Difference in percentage | -10.7 | 2-Sided | 95 | -33.38 | 11.99 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.076 |
| Difference in percentage |
| 20.1 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -1.53 |
| 41.83 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.816 | Difference in percentage | 2.7 | 2-Sided | 95 | -20.10 | 25.52 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.485 | Difference in percentage | 8.1 | 2-Sided | 95 | -14.61 | 30.87 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.816 | Difference in percentage | -2.7 | 2-Sided | 95 | -25.52 | 20.10 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.358 | Difference in percentage | -10.7 | 2-Sided | 95 | -33.38 | 11.99 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.630 |
| Difference in percentage |
| 5.1 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -15.43 |
| 25.54 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.972 | Difference in percentage | -0.4 | 2-Sided | 95 | -20.94 | 20.21 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.186 | Difference in percentage | -14.1 | 2-Sided | 95 | -34.83 | 6.70 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.142 | Difference in percentage | -12.6 | 2-Sided | 95 | -29.46 | 4.26 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.727 | Difference in percentage | -4.0 | 2-Sided | 95 | -20.34 | 11.52 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.194 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -0.17 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 0.132 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -0.44 |
| 0.09 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.863 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.02 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.132 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.24 | 0.29 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.452 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.10 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.129 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.16 | 0.35 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.738 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.05 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.141 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.23 | 0.33 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.572 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.08 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.148 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.21 | 0.38 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.796 |
| Difference in percentage |
| -3.0 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -25.77 |
| 19.77 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.540 | Difference in percentage | 7.0 | 2-Sided | 95 | -15.30 | 29.22 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.392 | Difference in percentage | -9.6 | 2-Sided | 95 | -31.39 | 12.19 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.776 | Difference in percentage | -3.3 | 2-Sided | 95 | -25.96 | 19.37 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.166 | Difference in percentage | -16.1 | 2-Sided | 95 | -38.64 | 6.40 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Chi-squared |
P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. |
| 0.444 |
| Difference in percentage |
| 7.9 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -12.17 |
| 28.00 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.885 | Difference in percentage | 1.6 | 2-Sided | 95 | -20.16 | 23.38 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.931 | Difference in percentage | -1.0 | 2-Sided | 95 | -22.54 | 20.64 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.836 | Difference in percentage | 2.2 | 2-Sided | 95 | -18.63 | 23.03 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Chi-squared | P-value is based on two-sided Pearson's chi-square test. | 0.836 | Difference in percentage | 2.2 | 2-Sided | 95 | -18.63 | 23.03 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.261 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| 2.8 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 2.45 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -2.1 |
| 7.7 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.514 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -1.5 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.36 | 2-Sided | 95 | -6.2 | 3.2 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.283 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.50 | 2-Sided | 95 | -7.7 | 2.3 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.461 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.75 | 2-Sided | 95 | -7.5 | 3.4 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.703 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -1.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.78 | 2-Sided | 95 | -6.6 | 4.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
| Fisher Exact |
Two-sided Fisher Exact test. |
| 0.468 |
| Difference in percentage |
| -6.4 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -22.34 |
| 8.81 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | Fisher Exact | Two-sided Fisher Exact test. | 0.142 | Difference in percentage | -11.9 | 2-Sided | 95 | -27.88 | 3.16 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | Fisher Exact | Two-sided Fisher Exact test. | 0.712 | Difference in percentage | 4.6 | 2-Sided | 95 | -11.08 | 19.83 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | Fisher Exact | Two-sided Fisher Exact test. | 0.482 | Difference in percentage | 7.2 | 2-Sided | 95 | -8.92 | 22.89 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | Fisher Exact | Two-sided Fisher Exact test. | 0.418 | Difference in percentage | -6.2 | 2-Sided | 95 | -21.18 | 7.69 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9; n=25, 25 |
|
| Month 12; n=25, 25 |
|
| Month 18; n=25, 25 |
|
| Month 24; n=25, 25 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.187 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -7.9 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 5.88 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -19.7 |
| 4.0 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.598 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -3.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 6.31 | 2-Sided | 95 | -16.1 | 9.4 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.558 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 3.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.75 | 2-Sided | 95 | -8.2 | 15.0 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.669 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 2.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 6.40 | 2-Sided | 95 | -10.1 | 15.6 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.865 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 1.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 6.16 | 2-Sided | 95 | -11.3 | 13.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9; n=35, 36 |
|
| Month 12; n=35, 36 |
|
| Month 18; n=35, 36 |
|
| Month 24; n=35, 36 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.447 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| 0.05 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 0.062 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -0.08 |
| 0.17 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.579 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.03 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.062 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.16 | 0.09 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.922 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.01 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.057 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.11 | 0.12 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.894 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.01 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.064 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.14 | 0.12 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.611 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -0.04 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.070 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.17 | 0.10 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.130 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| 7.9 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 5.15 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -2.4 |
| 18.2 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.649 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.26 | 2-Sided | 95 | -12.9 | 8.1 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.579 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 4.80 | 2-Sided | 95 | -12.3 | 6.9 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.826 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -1.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.03 | 2-Sided | 95 | -11.1 | 8.9 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.675 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | -2.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.72 | 2-Sided | 95 | -13.8 | 9.0 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
| 0.419 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| -1.4 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 1.76 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -4.9 |
| 2.1 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.692 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.42 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.3 | 3.4 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.357 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 1.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.69 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.8 | 5.0 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.420 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 1.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.67 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.0 | 4.7 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.380 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 1.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.58 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.8 | 4.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 |
|
| Month 12 |
|
| Month 18 |
|
| Month 24 |
|
|
Month 6 |
| ANCOVA |
The a priori threshold for statistical significance is P=0.01. |
| 0.003 |
P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. |
| LS Mean Difference |
| 0.8 |
| Standard Error of the Mean |
| 0.27 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| 0.3 |
| 1.3 |
| No |
| Superiority or Other |
| Month 9 | ANCOVA | 0.204 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.3 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.24 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.2 | 0.8 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 12 | ANCOVA | 0.227 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.3 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.22 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.2 | 0.7 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 18 | ANCOVA | 0.860 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.23 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.4 | 0.5 | No | Superiority or Other |
| Month 24 | ANCOVA | 0.476 | P-values are two-sided and are based on ANCOVA model with treatment group as the fixed effect and Baseline value as the covariate. | LS Mean Difference | 0.2 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.22 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.3 | 0.6 | No | Superiority or Other |
| >/= 1 insurance; n=35, 39 |
|
| RMAQ; n=25, 28 |
|
| SAAQ; n=25, 28 |
|
| Federal government; n=25, 28 |
|
| CSST; n=25, 28 |
|
| OHIP; n=25, 28 |
|
| IVAC; n=25, 28 |
|
| Blue Cross; n=25, 28 |
|
| Other; n=25, 28 |
|
| >/= 1 insurance; n=33, 37 |
|
| RMAQ; n=26, 26 |
|
| SAAQ; n=26, 26 |
|
| Federal government; n=26, 26 |
|
| CSST; n=26, 26 |
|
| OHIP; n=26, 26 |
|
| IVAC; n=26, 26 |
|
| Blue Cross; n=26, 26 |
|
| Other; n=26, 26 |
|
| Visits to another physician; n=11, 10 |
|
| Visits to a healthcare professional; n=11, 10 |
|
| Visit to hospital emergency room; n=11, 10 |
|
| Use of an ambulance service; n=11, 10 |
|
| Complementary/alternative therapy visits; n=11, 10 |
|
| Visits to another physician; n=2, 3 |
|
| Visits to a healthcare professional; n=2, 3 |
|
| Visit to hospital emergency room; n=2, 3 |
|
| Use of an ambulance service; n=2, 3 |
|
| Complementary/alternative therapy visits; n=2, 3 |
|
| Medical procedures/laboratory tests; n=0, 0 |
|
| Medical devices; n=2, 2 |
|
| Healthcare or extra help at home; n=0, 1 |
|
| Transportation costs; n=17, 12 |
|
| Medical procedures/laboratory tests; n=0, 0 |
|
| Medical devices; n=0, 0 |
|
| Healthcare or extra help at home; n=0, 0 |
|
| Transportation costs; n=4, 4 |
|