Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| CNTO136ARA3002 | Other Identifier | Janssen Research & Development, LLC | |
| 2010-022242-24 | EudraCT Number | ||
| U1111-1135-6325 | Other Identifier | Universal Trial Number |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| GlaxoSmithKline | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy of sirukumab as measured by the reduction of the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inhibition of radiographic progression in patients with active RA who are unresponsive to treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD).
Patients will be randomly assigned to treatment groups, and they and study personnel will not know the identity of the treatments given. Some patients will receive a placebo, which resembles a medication, but does not contain an active substance. This helps to determine if the study agent is effective. Patients will receive placebo or sirukumab by injection under the skin. The expected duration of the study is 120 weeks, which includes 104 weeks of treatment. Participants who complete participation in the study will be eligible for inclusion into the long-term safety and efficacy study, if enrollment at a participating site is available to them. If they do not participate in the long-term study, they will continue into the safety follow-up for approximately 16 weeks. The placebo-controlled portion of the study is through Week 52, when placebo patients will cross over to one of two sirukumab dose regimens. Patient safety will be monitored throughout the study.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo then Sirukumab 50 mg or Sirukumab 100 mg | Experimental |
| |
| Sirukumab 100 mg | Experimental |
| |
| Sirukumab 50 mg + Placebo | Experimental |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo | Drug | Form=solution for injection, route=subcutaneous use; every 2 weeks from Week 0 through Week 50. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 16 | ACR 20 response is greater than or equal to (>=) 20 percent (%) improvement in both tender joint count (68) and swollen joint count (66) and >= 20% improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments:Participant's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS) (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain),Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (scale ranges from 0= no difficulty to 3= inability to perform a task in that area), and Serum C-reactive protein (CRP). Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned, regardless of treatments they actually received. Here, TF= treatment failure. | Week 16 |
| Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Score at Week 52 | The van der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) score is defined as a measurement of progression in structural damage. It is the sum of joint erosion (32 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score and joint space narrowing (JSN) (30 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score. The joint erosion assessment is scored according to the surface area involved, from 0 to 5, with 0 indicating no erosion and 5 indicating complete collapse of bone whereas the JSN assessment including subluxation, is scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (bony ankylosis or complete luxation). The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 448 (worst) with higher scores indicating more joint damage. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. Here, EE= early escape. | Baseline, Week 52 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24 | The Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range: 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Janssen Research & Development, LLC Clinical Trial | Janssen Research & Development, LLC | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glendale | Arizona | United States | ||||
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 28855173 | Derived | Takeuchi T, Thorne C, Karpouzas G, Sheng S, Xu W, Rao R, Fei K, Hsu B, Tak PP. Sirukumab for rheumatoid arthritis: the phase III SIRROUND-D study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Dec;76(12):2001-2008. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-211328. Epub 2017 Aug 30. |
Not provided
Not provided
A total of 2746 participants were screened of which 1670 participants were randomized and received at least one administration of study treatment.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Placebo | Participants received Placebo subcutaneously (SC) every 2 weeks (q2w) from Week (W) 0 up to Week 50. Participants who met early escape (EE) criteria at Week 18, or late escape (LE) at Week 40, or cross-over (CO) at Week 52 were rerandomized to receive sirukumab 50 or 100 mg through Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prior to W52 Administration(Through W52) |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Placebo | Drug | Form=solution for injection, route=subcutaneous use; Weeks 2, 6, and every 4 weeks through Week 104. |
|
| Sirukumab | Drug | Type=exact, unit=mg, number=50 or 100, form=solution for injection, route=subcutaneous use; every 2 weeks for 100 mg and every 4 weeks for 50 mg, Week 52 through Week 104. |
|
| Sirukumab | Drug | Type=exact, unit=mg, number=100, form=solution for injection, route=subcutaneous use; Weeks 0, 2, and every 2 weeks through Week 104. |
|
| Sirukumab | Drug | Type=exact, unit=mg, number=50, form=solution for injection, route=subcutaneous use; Weeks 0, 4, and every 4 weeks through Week 104. |
|
| Baseline, Week 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 24 | An American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response is defined as >= 50 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) (C-reactive Protein (CRP) Remission at Week 24 | The DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. The Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive protein (CRP) remission is defined as a DAS28 (CRP) value of less than 2.6 at a visit. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 24 |
| Percentage of Participants With Major Clinical Response (MCR) at Week 52 | MCR- participant achieving ACR 70 response for 6 continuous months (24 weeks) in the study period (i.e., through Week 52). An ACR 70 response is defined as >= 70% improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (scale ranges from 0= no difficulty, to 3= inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response Through Week 52 | An ACR 20 response is defined as >= 20 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 20% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response | An ACR 50 response is defined as >= 50 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Response Through Week 52 | An ACR 70 response is defined as >= 70 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 90 Response Through Week 52 | An ACR 90 response is defined as >= 90 percent (%) improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 90% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive Protein (CRP) Response Through Week 52 | DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP), a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28), swollen joints (28), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both upper right extremity and upper left extremity as well as knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. Good responders: improvement from baseline greater than (>) 1.2 with DAS28 less than or equal to (<=) 3.2; moderate responders: improvement from baseline >1.2 with DAS28 >3.2 to <=5.1 or improvement from baseline >0.6 to <=1.2 with DAS28 <=5.1; non-responders: improvement from baseline <=0.6 or improvement from baseline >0.6 and <=1.2 with DAS28 >5.1. Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive Protein (CRP) Through Week 52 | The DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. A negative change from baseline in DAS28 (CRP) (that is, a decrease from baseline) indicates improvement from baseline. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) (C-reactive Protein (CRP) Remission Through Week 52 | The DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. The Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive protein (CRP) remission is defined as a DAS28 (CRP) value of less than 2.6 at a visit. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Score Through Week 52 | The SDAI score is a derived score combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity, physician's global assessments of disease activity, and CRP. The total score range is from 0 to 86 with a lower score indicating less disease activity. A negative change from baseline indicates an improvement and a positive change from baseline indicates a worsening. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Score Through Week 52 | The CDAI score is a derived score of 4 components: tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity, and physician's global assessments of disease activity. The total score ranges from 0 to 76 with a lower score indicating less disease activity. A negative change in CDAI score indicates an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicates a worsening of disease activity. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Simplified Disease Activity Index Based (SDAI-based) American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/ European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Remission Through Week 52 | Participant having SDAI-based ACR/EULAR remission at a visit if SDAI score is of <= 3.3. SDAI derived by combining 5 disease assessments: tender joint (28), swollen joint (28) counts, participants global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10 [0 =very well to 10 = very poor]), physicians global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10 [0=no arthritis to 10=extremely active arthritis]) and CRP. 28 joints evaluated for swelling and tenderness are same set of 28 joints used in DAS28 includes shoulder, elbow, wrist, MCP1, MCP2, MCP3, MCP4, MCP5, PIP1, PIP2, PIP3, PIP4, PIP5 joints of upper right and left extremities and knee joints of lower right and left extremities. Change from baseline in SDAI score measures change in disease activity, where negative change= improvement and positive change= worsening. Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned regardless of treatments actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Boolean-based American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/ European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Remission Through Week 52 | A participant was considered as having achieved the Boolean-based American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/ European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) remission at a visit if all of the following 4 criteria were met at that visit: Tender joint count (68 joints) less than or equal to (<=) 1; Swollen joint count (66 joints) <=1; CRP <=1 milligram per deciliter (mg/dL); Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity <=1 on a 0 (very well) to 10 (very poor) VAS. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score Through Week 52 | The Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects a worsening. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score From Week 0 Through Week 24 and From Week 0 Through Week 52 | HAQ-DI has 20-question in 8 functional areas: dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and daily living activities, scored from 0=no difficulty to 3=inability to perform task in that area. Overall score computed as sum of domain score divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0= least difficulty to 3= extreme difficulty. AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI score versus time. AUC was calculated based on measurement (observed HAQ-DI score change from baseline) at scheduled visits using trapezoidal rule.Functional status was determined as cumulative measure of HAQ-DI over 1 year by using AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI score through week 52. Decreases in AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI means greater average improvement in physical function over time. Participants analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned, regardless of treatments they actually received. | Week 0 Through Week 24 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Response Through Week 52 | HAQ-DI response was defined as change of less than -0.22 from baseline in HAQ-DI score. The HAQ-DI score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score of Less Than or Equal to 0.5 | HAQ-DI score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Score at Week 24 | vdH-S score is defined as a measurement of progression in structural damage. It is the sum of joint erosion (32 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score and joint space narrowing (JSN) (30 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score. The joint erosion assessment is scored according to the surface area involved, from 0 to 5, with 0 indicating no erosion and 5 indicating complete collapse of bone whereas the JSN assessment including subluxation, is scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (bony ankylosis or complete luxation). The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 448 (worst) with higher scores indicating more joint damage. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 24 |
| Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Sub-score by Type of Damage (Erosion or JSN) at Week 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS (i.e., JE score + JSN score) of 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 24 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Sub-score by Region Hand or Feet and Type Erosion or JSN at Week 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS (i.e., erosion score + JSN score) of 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 24 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde Modified Sharpe Score (vdH-S Score) Greater Than Smallest Detectable Change (SDC) at Weeks 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S). JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hand and 12 of feet joints, scored according to the surface area, from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete collapse of bone) whereas the JSN is summary of severity of 30 of hand and 12 of feet joints, scored according to the subluxation from 0 (normal) to 4 (bony ankylosis or complete luxation). The SDC is smallest change in score that is considered to be assessed correctly based on limits of agreement (that is., above the measurement error). The SDC for change from baseline in vdH-S Score is determined as: SDC=1.96 * SD / (root 2 * root k), where SD is the standard deviation of the difference between 2 readers in change from baseline in vdH-S score; k is the number of readers. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Weeks 24 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With a Change of Less Than or Equal to 0 From Baseline in Van Der Heijde Modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Score at Weeks 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS of (i.e., erosion score + JSN score) 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 24 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde Modified Sharpe Score (vdH-S Score) by Reader at Weeks 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS (i.e., JE score + JSN score) of 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Weeks 24 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Serum C-reactive Protein (CRP) Levels Through Week 52 | Serum CRP is a marker of systemic inflammation. A negative change from baseline in CRP represents improvement. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in the Duration of Morning Stiffness Through Week 52 | Duration of morning stiffness was defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and was able to resume normal activities without stiffness in minutes (If none was present = 0; If morning stiffness was continuing at the time of assessment or was unusual compared to the recent past, average of duration of stiffness over the past 3 days was reported; If stiffness persisted the entire day, 1440 minutes was recorded). Negative values for this outcome measure represent improvement, i.e. shortening of duration of morning stiffness. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Physical and Mental Component Summary Scores of 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Weeks 24 and 52 | SF-36 questionnaire is health related quality of life (QOL) instrument with 36 questions with 8 multi-item scales (evaluated limitations in): physical functioning due to health problems; usual role activities due to physical health problems; Bodily pain; General mental health (psychological distress and well-being); usual role activities due to personal or emotional problems; social functioning due to physical or mental health problems; Vitality (energy and fatigue); General health perception. Each 8 scales scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. Based on scale scores, summary scores, physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) will be derived. Scoring is derived based on algorithm developed in software provided by developer. Summary MCS and PCS score is also scaled from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned regardless of treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 24 and 52 |
| Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to 4-Point Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 | The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The questionnaire consists of 13 questions that assess a participant's level of fatigue and tiredness over the last 7 days. Each question is graded on a 5-point scale (0 - 4); and accordingly, the total FACIT-Fatigue scores can range from 0 to 52, with lower score reflecting more fatigue and higher scores reflecting less fatigue. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in Total Scores of Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 | The Work Limitations Questionnaire (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. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in EuroQol Health State Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS) | The EuroQol Health State Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS) records the respondent's self-rated health on a vertical line, VAS where the endpoints are labeled as 0= 'Worst imaginable health state' and 100= 'Best imaginable health state'. The EQ VAS can be used as a quantitative measure of health outcome as judged by the individual respondents. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Baseline, Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 |
| Change From Baseline in EuroQol EQ-5D-3L Descriptive System | The EQ-5D-3L Descriptive System comprises the following 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension is assessed on a 3-point ordinal scale (1=no problems, 2=some problems, 3=extreme problems). The responses to the five EQ-5D dimensions were scored using a utility-weighted algorithm to derive an EQ-5D health status index score between 0 to 1, with 1.00 indicating "full health" and 0 representing dead. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | at Week 8, 16, 24, and 52 |
| Mesa |
| Arizona |
| United States |
| Peoria | Arizona | United States |
| Phoenix | Arizona | United States |
| Covina | California | United States |
| El Cajon | California | United States |
| Glendale | California | United States |
| Hemet | California | United States |
| Huntington Beach | California | United States |
| La Jolla | California | United States |
| La Palma | California | United States |
| Whittier | California | United States |
| Aventura | Florida | United States |
| Brandon | Florida | United States |
| Daytona Beach | Florida | United States |
| Lake Mary | Florida | United States |
| Naples | Florida | United States |
| Palm Harbor | Florida | United States |
| Tampa | Florida | United States |
| Zephyrhills | Florida | United States |
| Indianapolis | Indiana | United States |
| Cedar Rapids | Iowa | United States |
| Bowling Green | Kentucky | United States |
| Monroe | Louisiana | United States |
| Wheaton | Maryland | United States |
| Eagan | Minnesota | United States |
| Springfield | Missouri | United States |
| St Louis | Missouri | United States |
| Omaha | Nebraska | United States |
| Albuquerque | New Mexico | United States |
| Brooklyn | New York | United States |
| Plainview | New York | United States |
| Charlotte | North Carolina | United States |
| Cincinnati | Ohio | United States |
| Middleburg Heights | Ohio | United States |
| Edmond | Oklahoma | United States |
| Tulsa | Oklahoma | United States |
| Duncansville | Pennsylvania | United States |
| Wyomissing | Pennsylvania | United States |
| Carrollton | Texas | United States |
| Corpus Christi | Texas | United States |
| Dallas | Texas | United States |
| Houston | Texas | United States |
| Lubbock | Texas | United States |
| Mesquite | Texas | United States |
| Kennewick | Washington | United States |
| Beckley | West Virginia | United States |
| Clarksburg | West Virginia | United States |
| Plovdiv | Bulgaria |
| Sofia | Bulgaria |
| Victoria | British Columbia | Canada |
| Winnipeg | Manitoba | Canada |
| Ottawa | Ontario | Canada |
| Burlington | Canada |
| Edmonton | Canada |
| Rancagua | Chile |
| Santiago | Chile |
| Valdivia | Chile |
| Bogotá | Colombia |
| Chía | Colombia |
| Medellín | Colombia |
| Osijek | Croatia |
| Rijeka | Croatia |
| Zagreb | Croatia |
| Ayauta-Gun | Japan |
| Bunkyō City | Japan |
| Fukuoka | Japan |
| Higashihiroshima | Japan |
| Izumo | Japan |
| Kagoshima | Japan |
| Katō | Japan |
| Kawagoe | Japan |
| Kita-Gun | Japan |
| Kumamoto | Japan |
| Kurume | Japan |
| Miyazaki | Japan |
| Nagano | Japan |
| Nagasaki | Japan |
| Nagoya | Japan |
| Osaka | Japan |
| Sapporo | Japan |
| Sasebo | Japan |
| Shimonoseki | Japan |
| Shimotsuke | Japan |
| Shinjuku-Ku | Japan |
| Sumida-Ku | Japan |
| Takaoka,Toyama | Japan |
| Takasaki | Japan |
| Tokorozawa | Japan |
| Tokushima | Japan |
| Tomishiro | Japan |
| Tsu | Japan |
| Ureshino | Japan |
| Yokohama | Japan |
| Alytus | Lithuania |
| Kaunas | Lithuania |
| Klaipėda | Lithuania |
| Šiauliai | Lithuania |
| Kuala Lumpur | Malaysia |
| Kuching | Malaysia |
| Cuernavaca | Mexico |
| Guadalajara | Mexico |
| Juárez | Mexico |
| Mexicali | Mexico |
| Mexico City | Mexico |
| Mérida | Mexico |
| México | Mexico |
| Morelia | Mexico |
| San Luis de Potosi | Mexico |
| Bialystok | Poland |
| Bydgoszcz | Poland |
| Elblag | Poland |
| Lublin | Poland |
| Poznan | Poland |
| Ustroń | Poland |
| Warsaw | Poland |
| Bucharest | Romania |
| Cluj-Napoca | Romania |
| Iași | Romania |
| Kemerovo | Russia |
| Moscow | Russia |
| Novosibirsk | Russia |
| Orenburg | Russia |
| Ryazan | Russia |
| Saint Petersburg | Russia |
| Saratov | Russia |
| Smolensk | Russia |
| Ulyanovsk | Russia |
| Yaroslavl | Russia |
| Belgrade | Serbia |
| Kragujevac | Serbia |
| Niška Banja | Serbia |
| Cape Town | South Africa |
| Port Elizabeth | South Africa |
| Pretoria | South Africa |
| Busan | South Korea |
| Daegu | South Korea |
| Daejeon | South Korea |
| Gwangju | South Korea |
| Incheon | South Korea |
| Jeonju | South Korea |
| Namdong-Gu | South Korea |
| Seongnam-si | South Korea |
| Seoul | South Korea |
| Suwon | South Korea |
| Kaohsiung City | Taiwan |
| Taichung | Taiwan |
| Taipei | Taiwan |
| Donetsk | Ukraine |
| Kharkiv | Ukraine |
| Kiev | Ukraine |
| Kyiv | Ukraine |
| Odesa | Ukraine |
| Sympheropol | Ukraine |
| Vinnytsia | Ukraine |
| Zaporizhzhia | Ukraine |
| FG001 | Placebo to 50 mg q4w Due to EE/LE/CO | Participants who were assigned to placebo group and who met EE at Week 18 or LE at Week 40 or CO at Week 52 were re-randomized to receive subcutaneous (SC) sirukumab 50 mg dose regimen q4w up to Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| FG002 | Sirukumab 50 mg q4w | All participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| FG003 | Placebo to 100 mg q2w Due to EE/LE/CO | Participants who were assigned to placebo group and who met EE at Week 18 or LE at Week 40 or CO at Week 52 were re-randomized to receive subcutaneous (SC) sirukumab 100 mg dose regimen q2w up to Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| FG004 | Sirukumab 100 mg q2w | All participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| Participants Re-randomized at Week 18 |
|
| Participants Re-randomized at Week 40 |
|
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
| Week 52 to Week 104 |
|
|
| Safety Follow-up Period (Week 104-120) |
|
|
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Placebo | Participants received Placebo subcutaneously (SC) every 2 weeks (q2w) from Week 0 up to Week 50. Participants who met early escape (EE) criteria at Week 18, or late escape (LE) at Week 40, or cross-over (CO) at Week 52 were rerandomized to receive sirukumab 50 or 100 mg through Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| BG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg q4w | All participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| BG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg q2w | All participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. |
| BG003 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Region of Enrollment | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 16 | ACR 20 response is greater than or equal to (>=) 20 percent (%) improvement in both tender joint count (68) and swollen joint count (66) and >= 20% improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments:Participant's assessment of pain using visual analog scale (VAS) (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain),Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (scale ranges from 0= no difficulty to 3= inability to perform a task in that area), and Serum C-reactive protein (CRP). Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned, regardless of treatments they actually received. Here, TF= treatment failure. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders if meeting TF criteria prior to week 16 or having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 16 |
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary | Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Score at Week 52 | The van der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) score is defined as a measurement of progression in structural damage. It is the sum of joint erosion (32 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score and joint space narrowing (JSN) (30 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score. The joint erosion assessment is scored according to the surface area involved, from 0 to 5, with 0 indicating no erosion and 5 indicating complete collapse of bone whereas the JSN assessment including subluxation, is scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (bony ankylosis or complete luxation). The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 448 (worst) with higher scores indicating more joint damage. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. Here, EE= early escape. | Efficacy full analysis set (radiographic endpoints) had randomized participants received at least 1 (partial/complete) dose of study drug with non-missing baseline vdH-S score. It was based on imputed value by EE Rules: set scores after EE missing for placebo arm; and then missing data rules in all treatment arms using linear extrapolation method. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24 | The Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range: 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE was used to replace the data after EE for participants who met EE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on Scale | Baseline, Week 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 24 | An American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response is defined as >= 50 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders if meeting EE or TF criteria prior to week 24 or having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) (C-reactive Protein (CRP) Remission at Week 24 | The DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. The Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive protein (CRP) remission is defined as a DAS28 (CRP) value of less than 2.6 at a visit. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to not achieving DAS28 remission if meeting EE or TF criteria prior to week 24 or having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 24 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Major Clinical Response (MCR) at Week 52 | MCR- participant achieving ACR 70 response for 6 continuous months (24 weeks) in the study period (i.e., through Week 52). An ACR 70 response is defined as >= 70% improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (scale ranges from 0= no difficulty, to 3= inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders if meeting EE, LE or TF criteria prior to week 52 or having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response Through Week 52 | An ACR 20 response is defined as >= 20 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 20% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area), and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response | An ACR 50 response is defined as >= 50 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 50% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Response Through Week 52 | An ACR 70 response is defined as >= 70 % improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 90 Response Through Week 52 | An ACR 90 response is defined as >= 90 percent (%) improvement in both tender joint count (68 joints) and swollen joint count (66 joints) and >= 90% improvement in 3 of the following 5 assessments: Participant's assessment of pain using VAS (0-10 scale, 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain), Participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0 = very well to 10 = very poor]), Physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 to 10, [0=no arthritis activity to 10=extremely active arthritis]), Participant's assessment of physical function as measured by HAQ-DI (the scale ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and Serum CRP. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive Protein (CRP) Response Through Week 52 | DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP), a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28), swollen joints (28), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both upper right extremity and upper left extremity as well as knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. Good responders: improvement from baseline greater than (>) 1.2 with DAS28 less than or equal to (<=) 3.2; moderate responders: improvement from baseline >1.2 with DAS28 >3.2 to <=5.1 or improvement from baseline >0.6 to <=1.2 with DAS28 <=5.1; non-responders: improvement from baseline <=0.6 or improvement from baseline >0.6 and <=1.2 with DAS28 >5.1. Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to non-responders after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive Protein (CRP) Through Week 52 | The DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. A negative change from baseline in DAS28 (CRP) (that is, a decrease from baseline) indicates improvement from baseline. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) (C-reactive Protein (CRP) Remission Through Week 52 | The DAS28 based on C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is a statistically derived index combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), CRP and patient's global assessment of disease activity. The set of 28 joint count is based on evaluation of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) MCP1 to MCP5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) PIP1 to PIP5 joints of both the upper right extremity and the upper left extremity as well as the knee joints of lower right and lower left extremities. The values are 0=best to 10=worst. The Disease Activity Index Score 28 (DAS28) C-reactive protein (CRP) remission is defined as a DAS28 (CRP) value of less than 2.6 at a visit. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to not achieving DAS28 remission after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Score Through Week 52 | The SDAI score is a derived score combining tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity, physician's global assessments of disease activity, and CRP. The total score range is from 0 to 86 with a lower score indicating less disease activity. A negative change from baseline indicates an improvement and a positive change from baseline indicates a worsening. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Score Through Week 52 | The CDAI score is a derived score of 4 components: tender joints (28 joints), swollen joints (28 joints), patient's global assessment of disease activity, and physician's global assessments of disease activity. The total score ranges from 0 to 76 with a lower score indicating less disease activity. A negative change in CDAI score indicates an improvement in disease activity and a positive change in score indicates a worsening of disease activity. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Simplified Disease Activity Index Based (SDAI-based) American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/ European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Remission Through Week 52 | Participant having SDAI-based ACR/EULAR remission at a visit if SDAI score is of <= 3.3. SDAI derived by combining 5 disease assessments: tender joint (28), swollen joint (28) counts, participants global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10 [0 =very well to 10 = very poor]), physicians global assessment of disease activity using VAS (scale ranges from 0 to 10 [0=no arthritis to 10=extremely active arthritis]) and CRP. 28 joints evaluated for swelling and tenderness are same set of 28 joints used in DAS28 includes shoulder, elbow, wrist, MCP1, MCP2, MCP3, MCP4, MCP5, PIP1, PIP2, PIP3, PIP4, PIP5 joints of upper right and left extremities and knee joints of lower right and left extremities. Change from baseline in SDAI score measures change in disease activity, where negative change= improvement and positive change= worsening. Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned regardless of treatments actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to not achieving SDAI-based remission after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Boolean-based American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/ European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Remission Through Week 52 | A participant was considered as having achieved the Boolean-based American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/ European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) remission at a visit if all of the following 4 criteria were met at that visit: Tender joint count (68 joints) less than or equal to (<=) 1; Swollen joint count (66 joints) <=1; CRP <=1 milligram per deciliter (mg/dL); Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity <=1 on a 0 (very well) to 10 (very poor) VAS. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Participants were set to not achieving Boolean-based remission after meeting EE, LE or TF criteria (whichever is earliest) or if having data missing. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score Through Week 52 | The Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects a worsening. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score From Week 0 Through Week 24 and From Week 0 Through Week 52 | HAQ-DI has 20-question in 8 functional areas: dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and daily living activities, scored from 0=no difficulty to 3=inability to perform task in that area. Overall score computed as sum of domain score divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0= least difficulty to 3= extreme difficulty. AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI score versus time. AUC was calculated based on measurement (observed HAQ-DI score change from baseline) at scheduled visits using trapezoidal rule.Functional status was determined as cumulative measure of HAQ-DI over 1 year by using AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI score through week 52. Decreases in AUC of change from baseline in HAQ-DI means greater average improvement in physical function over time. Participants analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned, regardless of treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale*Day | Week 0 Through Week 24 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Response Through Week 52 | HAQ-DI response was defined as change of less than -0.22 from baseline in HAQ-DI score. The HAQ-DI score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score of Less Than or Equal to 0.5 | HAQ-DI score is an evaluation of the functional status for a participant. The 20-question instrument assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. Last Observation at or prior EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Score at Week 24 | vdH-S score is defined as a measurement of progression in structural damage. It is the sum of joint erosion (32 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score and joint space narrowing (JSN) (30 joints of the hands and 12 joints of the feet) score. The joint erosion assessment is scored according to the surface area involved, from 0 to 5, with 0 indicating no erosion and 5 indicating complete collapse of bone whereas the JSN assessment including subluxation, is scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (bony ankylosis or complete luxation). The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 448 (worst) with higher scores indicating more joint damage. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Efficacy full analysis set (radiographic endpoints) had randomized participants received at least 1 (partial/complete) dose of study drug with non-missing baseline vdH-S score. It was based on imputed value by EE Rules: set scores after EE missing for placebo arm; and then missing data rules in all treatment arms using linear extrapolation method. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 24 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Sub-score by Type of Damage (Erosion or JSN) at Week 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS (i.e., JE score + JSN score) of 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Efficacy full analysis set (radiographic endpoints) had randomized participants received at least 1 (partial/complete) dose of study drug with non-missing baseline vdH-S score. It was based on imputed value by EE Rules: set scores after EE missing for placebo arm; and then missing data rules in all treatment arms using linear extrapolation method. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 24 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde-modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Sub-score by Region Hand or Feet and Type Erosion or JSN at Week 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS (i.e., erosion score + JSN score) of 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Efficacy full analysis set (radiographic endpoints) had randomized participants received at least 1 (partial/complete) dose of study drug with non-missing baseline vdH-S score. It was based on imputed value by EE Rules: set scores after EE missing for placebo arm; and then missing data rules in all treatment arms using linear extrapolation method. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 24 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde Modified Sharpe Score (vdH-S Score) Greater Than Smallest Detectable Change (SDC) at Weeks 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S). JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hand and 12 of feet joints, scored according to the surface area, from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete collapse of bone) whereas the JSN is summary of severity of 30 of hand and 12 of feet joints, scored according to the subluxation from 0 (normal) to 4 (bony ankylosis or complete luxation). The SDC is smallest change in score that is considered to be assessed correctly based on limits of agreement (that is., above the measurement error). The SDC for change from baseline in vdH-S Score is determined as: SDC=1.96 * SD / (root 2 * root k), where SD is the standard deviation of the difference between 2 readers in change from baseline in vdH-S score; k is the number of readers. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Efficacy full analysis set (radiographic endpoints) had randomized participants received at least 1 (partial/complete) dose of study drug with non-missing baseline vdH-S score. It was based on imputed value by EE Rules: set scores after EE missing for placebo arm; and then missing data rules in all treatment arms using linear extrapolation method. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Weeks 24 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With a Change of Less Than or Equal to 0 From Baseline in Van Der Heijde Modified Sharpe (vdH-S) Score at Weeks 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS of (i.e., erosion score + JSN score) 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Efficacy full analysis set (radiographic endpoints) had randomized participants received at least 1 (partial/complete) dose of study drug with non-missing baseline vdH-S score. It was based on imputed value by EE Rules: set scores after EE missing for placebo arm; and then missing data rules in all treatment arms using linear extrapolation method. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 24 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Van Der Heijde Modified Sharpe Score (vdH-S Score) by Reader at Weeks 24 and 52 | vdH-S score measures structural damage progression as sum of joint erosion(JE) and joint space narrowing(JSN) scores(S).JE is summary of erosion severity in 32 of hands(H) and 12 of feet(F) joints, scored as per surface area- from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (complete(CM) collapse of bone). Maximum (MAX) JES for H-160 (32*5) and MAX JES for F- 120 (12*10 [5*2 sides of foot]). MAX JES is 280 whereas JSN is summary of severity of 30 of H and 12 of F joints, scored to subluxation from 0(normal) to 4(bony ankylosis or CM luxation). MAX JSNS for H-120(30*4), and MAX JSS for F-48(12*4). MAX JSNS is 168.Thus MAX JES-280 combined with MAX JSNS-168 gives worst possible vdH-SS (i.e., JE score + JSN score) of 448. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Efficacy full analysis set (radiographic endpoints) had randomized participants received at least 1 (partial/complete) dose of study drug with non-missing baseline vdH-S score. It was based on imputed value by EE Rules: set scores after EE missing for placebo arm; and then missing data rules in all treatment arms using linear extrapolation method. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Weeks 24 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Serum C-reactive Protein (CRP) Levels Through Week 52 | Serum CRP is a marker of systemic inflammation. A negative change from baseline in CRP represents improvement. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. The last observation at or prior to EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Milligram per Deciliter | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in the Duration of Morning Stiffness Through Week 52 | Duration of morning stiffness was defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and was able to resume normal activities without stiffness in minutes (If none was present = 0; If morning stiffness was continuing at the time of assessment or was unusual compared to the recent past, average of duration of stiffness over the past 3 days was reported; If stiffness persisted the entire day, 1440 minutes was recorded). Negative values for this outcome measure represent improvement, i.e. shortening of duration of morning stiffness. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants. Here 'N'(number of participants analyzed): Evaluable for this outcome measure. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. The last observation at or prior to EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minutes | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Physical and Mental Component Summary Scores of 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Weeks 24 and 52 | SF-36 questionnaire is health related quality of life (QOL) instrument with 36 questions with 8 multi-item scales (evaluated limitations in): physical functioning due to health problems; usual role activities due to physical health problems; Bodily pain; General mental health (psychological distress and well-being); usual role activities due to personal or emotional problems; social functioning due to physical or mental health problems; Vitality (energy and fatigue); General health perception. Each 8 scales scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. Based on scale scores, summary scores, physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) will be derived. Scoring is derived based on algorithm developed in software provided by developer. Summary MCS and PCS score is also scaled from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. Participants were analyzed according to randomized treatment groups they were assigned regardless of treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. The last observation at or prior to EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 24 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Greater Than or Equal to 4-Point Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Score at Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 | The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) is a questionnaire that assesses self-reported tiredness, weakness, and difficulty conducting usual activities due to fatigue. The questionnaire consists of 13 questions that assess a participant's level of fatigue and tiredness over the last 7 days. Each question is graded on a 5-point scale (0 - 4); and accordingly, the total FACIT-Fatigue scores can range from 0 to 52, with lower score reflecting more fatigue and higher scores reflecting less fatigue. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. The last observation at or prior to EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Number | Percentage of Participants | Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Total Scores of Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 | The Work Limitations Questionnaire (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. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants. Here 'N'(number of participants analyzed): Evaluable for this outcome measure. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. The last observation at or prior to EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in EuroQol Health State Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS) | The EuroQol Health State Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS) records the respondent's self-rated health on a vertical line, VAS where the endpoints are labeled as 0= 'Worst imaginable health state' and 100= 'Best imaginable health state'. The EQ VAS can be used as a quantitative measure of health outcome as judged by the individual respondents. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set was defined as all randomized participants. Here 'N'(number of participants analyzed): Evaluable for this outcome measure. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. The last observation at or prior to EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | Baseline, Week 8, 16, 24, 36 and 52 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in EuroQol EQ-5D-3L Descriptive System | The EQ-5D-3L Descriptive System comprises the following 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension is assessed on a 3-point ordinal scale (1=no problems, 2=some problems, 3=extreme problems). The responses to the five EQ-5D dimensions were scored using a utility-weighted algorithm to derive an EQ-5D health status index score between 0 to 1, with 1.00 indicating "full health" and 0 representing dead. Participants were analyzed according to the randomized treatment groups they were assigned to, regardless of the treatments they actually received. | Full analysis set included all randomized participants. Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF) method was used to impute missing values. The last observation at or prior to EE/LE was used to replace the data after EE/LE for participants who met EE/LE criteria. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Units on a Scale | at Week 8, 16, 24, and 52 |
|
Screening up to Week 120
Safety population included all participants received at least 1 partial or complete dose of study drug and analyzed in the treatment they actually received over study period, regardless of the treatments they were randomized to. One Participant randomized to sirukumab 50 mg but inadvertently received 1 dose of 100 mg at week 16. The participant was included in 100 mg group for safety, due to which total participants increased by 1 in 100 mg group (558) and decreased by 1 in 50 mg group (556).
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 | Week 0 to Week 120-Placebo | Participants received matching placebo from week 0 to week 50, every 2 weeks (q2w) until either early escape (EE) at Week 18 or late escape (LE) at Week 40 or crossover (CO) at Week 52 and were rerandomized to subcutaneous (SC) sirukumab 50 mg q4w or sirukumab 100 mg q2w dose regimens up to Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. | 40 | 556 | 213 | 556 | ||
| EG001 | W0 to W120-Placebo to Sirukumab 50 mg q4w Due to EE/LE or CO | Participants who received placebo in the placebo controlled period were rerandomized (due to EE at Week 18 or LE at Week 40 or CO at Week 52) to receive subcutaneous (SC) sirukumab 50 mg q4w dose regimen up to Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. | 30 | 242 | 113 | 242 | ||
| EG002 | W0 to W120- Sirukumab 50 mg q4w | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 4, and q4w through Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. | 111 | 556 | 355 | 556 | ||
| EG003 | W0 to W120- Placebo to Sirukumab 100 mg q2w Due to EE/LE or CO | Participants who received placebo in the placebo controlled period were rerandomized (due to EE at Week 18 or LE at Week 40 or CO at Week 52) to receive subcutaneous (SC) sirukumab 100 mg q2w dose up to Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. | 35 | 241 | 128 | 241 | ||
| EG004 | W0 to W120-Sirukumab 100 mg q2w | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2 and q2w throught Week 104. Participants who completed study agent administration up to Week 104 and did not elect for long term extension (LTE) were followed up for safety from Week 104 up to Week 120. | 97 | 558 | 353 | 558 |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anaemia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neutropenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pancytopenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thrombocytopenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute Left Ventricular Failure | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Angina Pectoris | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Atrial Fibrillation | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bradycardia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac Failure Congestive | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiopulmonary Failure | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Myocardial Infarction | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Sinus Bradycardia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Basedow's Disease | Endocrine disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Goitre | Endocrine disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Amaurosis Fugax | Eye disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cataract | Eye disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Keratitis | Eye disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Retinal Detachment | Eye disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Scleritis | Eye disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ulcerative Keratitis | Eye disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abdominal Strangulated Hernia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Colitis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diarrhoea | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diverticular Perforation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Enterocele | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Erosive Duodenitis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric Perforation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric Polyps | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric Ulcer | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric Ulcer Haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastritis Erosive | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastrointestinal Hypomotility | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastrointestinal Necrosis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastrointestinal Perforation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haemorrhoidal Haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intestinal Obstruction | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pancreatic Fistula | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pancreatitis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Retroperitoneal Haemorrhage | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Vomiting | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Asthenia | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chest Pain | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Death | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Influenza Like Illness | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Medical Device Site Joint Inflammation | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Serositis | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Sudden Cardiac Death | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cholecystitis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cholecystitis Acute | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cholelithiasis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gallbladder Perforation | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hepatic Cyst | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hepatic Steatosis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Jaundice Cholestatic | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis | Hepatobiliary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Drug Hypersensitivity | Immune system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abdominal Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abdominal Sepsis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abscess Limb | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abscess Soft Tissue | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Appendicitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Appendicitis Perforated | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Arthritis Bacterial | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bacterial Food Poisoning | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bacterial Sepsis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bronchitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cellulitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cellulitis Staphylococcal | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cytomegalovirus Colitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dengue Fever | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Device Related Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diverticulitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Endophthalmitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Epididymitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Erysipelas | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Escherichia Bacteraemia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Extradural Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Eye Infection Fungal | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gangrene | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastroenteritis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hepatitis E | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Herpes Zoster | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Infected Bite | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Infectious Pleural Effusion | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Infective Spondylitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intervertebral Discitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Localised Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lung Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lymphangitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Meningitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Necrotising Fasciitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Osteomyelitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Osteomyelitis Chronic | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Perirectal Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Peritonitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Peritonsillar Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pharyngitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonia Bacterial | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonia Necrotising | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Post Procedural Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Postoperative Wound Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary Tuberculosis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyelonephritis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyelonephritis Acute | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyoderma | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyonephrosis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Salpingitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Salpingo-Oophoritis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Sepsis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Septic Shock | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Soft Tissue Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Subcutaneous Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urinary Tract Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Varicella | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Wound Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abdominal Injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chemical Peritonitis | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Concussion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Contusion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Epiphyseal Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Facial Bones Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Femoral Neck Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Femur Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Foot Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hand Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hip Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Humerus Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Joint Capsule Rupture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Joint Dislocation | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Kidney Rupture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Laceration | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ligament Sprain | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lower Limb Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lumbar Vertebral Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Meniscus Injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Multiple Fractures | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Muscle Rupture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Post Procedural Complication | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Postoperative Wound Complication | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Procedural Haemorrhage | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Procedural Pain | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Radius Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rib Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Road Traffic Accident | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Spinal Compression Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Tendon Injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Tendon Rupture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ulna Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Upper Limb Fracture | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Wound Dehiscence | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Alanine Aminotransferase Increased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Aspartate Aminotransferase Increased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Blood Bilirubin Increased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chest X-Ray Abnormal | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hepatic Enzyme Increased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Liver Function Test Increased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Weight Decreased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dehydration | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diabetes Mellitus | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypercalcaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hyperglycaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypokalaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Arthralgia | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Atlantoaxial Instability | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Back Pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bursitis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chondromalacia | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Fistula | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Fistula Discharge | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Foot Deformity | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intervertebral Disc Disorder | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intervertebral Disc Protrusion | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lumbar Spinal Stenosis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Musculoskeletal Chest Pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Osteoarthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rheumatoid Arthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rheumatoid Nodule | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rotator Cuff Syndrome | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Spinal Pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Spondylolisthesis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Synovitis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute Myeloid Leukaemia | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Adrenal Adenoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Basal Cell Carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Benign Neoplasm of Thyroid Gland | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bladder Cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bladder Transitional Cell Carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Breast Cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Colon Cancer Metastatic | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastric Cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumour | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Glioblastoma Multiforme | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intraductal Papilloma of Breast | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Invasive Ductal Breast Carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Leiomyoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lung Cancer Metastatic | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lung Neoplasm Malignant | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Meningioma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Metastases to Bone | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Metastases to Central Nervous System | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neuroendocrine Carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Teratoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Uterine Cancer | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Uterine Leiomyoma | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Carpal Tunnel Syndrome | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cerebral Infarction | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cerebral Ischaemia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cerebrovascular Accident | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cervical Myelopathy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cervical Radiculopathy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haemorrhagic Stroke | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Headache | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypertensive Encephalopathy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Intracranial Aneurysm | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ischaemic Stroke | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lumbar Radiculopathy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyramidal Tract Syndrome | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Radiculopathy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Reversible Cerebral Vasoconstriction Syndrome | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Transient Ischaemic Attack | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Trigeminal Neuralgia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ulnar Nerve Palsy | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Vertebrobasilar Insufficiency | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abortion Spontaneous | Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Blighted Ovum | Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Device Dislocation | Product Issues | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Device Failure | Product Issues | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Anxiety | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Mental Status Changes | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Suicidal Ideation | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute Kidney Injury | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Calculus Urinary | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hydronephrosis | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nephrolithiasis | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ureterolithiasis | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urinary Tract Obstruction | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Breast Mass | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cystocele | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Endometriosis | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ovarian Cyst | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rectocele | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Vaginal Haemorrhage | Reproductive system and breast disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acute Respiratory Failure | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Asthma | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cough | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dyspnoea | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Epistaxis | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Interstitial Lung Disease | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lung Disorder | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pleural Effusion | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pleurisy | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonia Aspiration | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumonitis | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pneumothorax Spontaneous | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary Embolism | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary Mass | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary Necrosis | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Respiratory Failure | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Angioedema | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Decubitus Ulcer | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dermatitis Allergic | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dermatitis Bullous | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dermatitis Contact | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haemorrhage Subcutaneous | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hyperkeratosis | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin Exfoliation | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin Necrosis | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin Ulcer | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Stevens-Johnson Syndrome | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urticaria | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Aortic Aneurysm | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Aortic Dissection | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Axillary Vein Thrombosis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Deep Vein Thrombosis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Extremity Necrosis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haematoma | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypertension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypotension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Labile Hypertension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Necrosis Ischaemic | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Peripheral Ischaemia | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Shock | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Subclavian Vein Thrombosis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thrombosed Varicose Vein | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Vasculitis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Venous Thrombosis Limb | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leukopenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neutropenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diarrhoea | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Injection Site Erythema | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Injection Site Pruritus | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Injection Site Swelling | General disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bronchitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nasopharyngitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pharyngitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Upper Respiratory Tract Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urinary Tract Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Alanine Aminotransferase Increased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Aspartate Aminotransferase Increased | Investigations | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rheumatoid Arthritis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Headache | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypertension | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 17.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
The short pure placebo-controlled period (through Week 18) and the EE at Week 18 and LE at Week 40 for participants in the placebo group might have affected the ability to directly compare safety between sirukumab and placebo groups through Week 52.
A copy of the manuscript must be provided to the sponsor for review at least 60 days before submission for publication or presentation. If requested in writing, such publication will be withheld for up to an additional 60 days.
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Associate Director | Janssen Research & Development, LLC | ClinicalTrialDisclosure@its.jnj.com |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001172 | Arthritis, Rheumatoid |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001168 | Arthritis |
| D007592 | Joint Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
| D012216 | Rheumatic Diseases |
| D003240 | Connective Tissue Diseases |
| D017437 | Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases |
| D001327 | Autoimmune Diseases |
| D007154 | Immune System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| C568922 | sirukumab |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Withdrawal by Subject |
|
| Adverse Event |
|
| Death |
|
| Lack of Efficacy |
|
| Physician Decision |
|
| Pregnancy |
|
| Other |
|
| Withdrawal by Subject |
|
| Other |
|
| Male |
|
| Canada |
|
| Chile |
|
| Colombia |
|
| Croatia |
|
| Japan |
|
| Lithuania |
|
| Malaysia |
|
| Mexico |
|
| Poland |
|
| Republic of Korea |
|
| Romania |
|
| Russian Federation |
|
| Serbia |
|
| South Africa |
|
| Taiwan, Province of China |
|
| Ukraine |
|
| United States |
|
| Percentage Difference |
| 27.1 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| 21.6 |
| 32.6 |
| Superiority or Other |
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| Sirukumab 50 mg |
Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| Sirukumab 50 mg |
Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
| OG001 | Sirukumab 50 mg | Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104.
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|
Participants received 50 mg of sirukumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks (q4w) for 104 weeks and in between placebo SC injections was received at Weeks 2, 6, and q4w through Week 104. |
| OG002 | Sirukumab 100 mg | Participants received 100 mg of sirukumab SC injections at Weeks 0, 2, and q2w through Week 104. |
|
|