Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| U1111-1146-1219 | Other Identifier | WHO | |
| 2013-002806-30 | EudraCT Number | ||
| 172235 | Registry Identifier | HC-CTD |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to establish proof of efficacy for namilumab in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, measured as Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)75 response rate at Week 12.
The drug tested in this study is called namilumab. Namilumab was tested to prove its effectiveness in treating moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. This study looked at improvement of plaque psoriasis in participants who take namilumab.
The study enrolled 122 participants. Participants were randomly assigned (by chance, like flipping a coin) to one of five treatment groups that were undisclosed to the patient and study doctor during the study (unless there was an urgent medical need):
This study consisted of two parts. Eligible participants received 10 weeks of treatment with double-blinded study medication, followed by an extended treatment period (active extension period, intended to be 52 weeks) with open-label study medication. At Week 12, participants were assessed for primary endpoint response, which determined the course of their progression through the open-label treatment period. Participants who showed >=75% reduction of Baseline (Day 1) PASI at Week 12, "Responders", began a washout interval (for a maximum of 24 weeks) with no use of study medication: this interval continued until a partial (25%) loss of Week 12 treatment response is recorded in assessments conducted on a 2-weekly basis - thereby prompting the start of dosing with open-label (OL) study medication (Day 0 OL through Week 52 OL). In contrast, participants who did not show >=75% reduction of Baseline PASI score at Week 12, "Partial/Non-Responders", began the open-label extension period 4 weeks after the final dose of blinded study medication.
Participants were then followed-up through an 18-week post-treatment assessment period during which no medication was given. During the open-label extension period participants began dosing with 80 mg namilumab; however, if an inadequate treatment response was recorded, then dose escalation to 150 mg namilumab was implemented.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blinded period: Namilumab 300 mg + namilumab 150 mg | Experimental | Namilumab 300 mg (2 separate injections of 150 mg), subcutaneous injection, on Day 1, followed by namilumab 150 mg subcutaneous injection, on Days 15, 43 and 71. |
|
| Blinded period: Namilumab 160 mg + namilumab 80 mg | Experimental | Namilumab 160 mg (2 separate injections of 80 mg), subcutaneous injection, on Day 1, followed by namilumab 80 mg subcutaneous injection, on Days 15, 43 and 71. |
|
| Blinded period: Namilumab 100 mg + namilumab 50 mg | Experimental | Namilumab 100 mg (2 separate injections of 50 mg), subcutaneous injection, on Day 1, followed by namilumab 50 mg subcutaneous injection, on Days 15, 43 and 71. |
|
| Blinded period: Namilumab 40 mg + namilumab 20 mg | Experimental | Namilumab 40 mg (2 separate injections of 20 mg), subcutaneous injection, on Day 1, followed by namilumab 20 mg subcutaneous injection, on Days 15, 43 and 71. |
|
| Blinded period: Placebo | Placebo Comparator | Placebo (2 separate injections), subcutaneous injection, on Day 1, followed by placebo, subcutaneous injection, on Days 15, 43 and 71. |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Namilumab | Drug | Namilumab subcutaneous injection |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants Achieving 75 Percent Reduction From Baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score (PASI75 Response) at Week 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 75% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. | Week 12 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants Achieving 75 Percent Reduction From Baseline PASI Score (PASI75 Response) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 10 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 75% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Medical Director, Clinical Science | Takeda | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calgary | Alberta | Canada | ||||
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30207587 | Derived | Papp KA, Gooderham M, Jenkins R, Vender R, Szepietowski JC, Wagner T, Hunt B, Souberbielle B; NEPTUNE investigators. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) as a therapeutic target in psoriasis: randomized, controlled investigation using namilumab, a specific human anti-GM-CSF monoclonal antibody. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Jun;180(6):1352-1360. doi: 10.1111/bjd.17195. Epub 2018 Nov 2. |
Not provided
Not provided
Participants with diagnosis of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis without clinically significant lung/respiratory disorders were screened for enrollment into the study.To fulfill screening requirements,chest X-ray was carried out prior to Baseline visit which included assignment to the double-blind study treatment and first dosing with study drug.
Participants were enrolled into the double-blind treatment evaluation at 17 investigative sites in Canada, Denmark, Germany, Latvia, and Poland. Only those sites in Denmark, Latvia and Poland participated in the extension period which included open-label treatment with study medication.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Double-Blind Period: Placebo | Namilumab-matching placebo solution (2 separate injections) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab-matching placebo, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| FG001 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 20 mg | Namilumab 40 milligram (mg) injection (2 separate injections of 20 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 20 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| FG002 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 50 mg | Namilumab 100 mg injection (2 separate injections of 50 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 50 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| FG003 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 80 mg | Namilumab 160 mg injection (2 separate injections of 80 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 80 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| FG004 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 150 mg | Namilumab 300 mg injection (2 separate injections of 150 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 150 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| FG005 | Open-Label Period: Namilumab 80 mg | Namilumab 80 mg, single injection, subcutaneously, every 4 weeks for 52 weeks during the open-label period on the basis of treatment response. |
| FG006 | Open-Label Period: Namilumab 150 mg | Namilumab 150 mg, single injection, subcutaneously from Week 8 and then every 4 weeks for 52 weeks during the open-label period on the basis of treatment response. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Double-Blind Period |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
| Open-Label Period |
|
Randomized set included all participants randomized in this study.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Double-Blind Period: Placebo | Namilumab-matching placebo solution (2 separate injections) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab-matching placebo, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| BG001 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 20 mg |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Percentage of Participants Achieving 75 Percent Reduction From Baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) Score (PASI75 Response) at Week 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 75% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. | Full analysis set (FAS) where baseline and Week 12 assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Week 12 |
Treatment-emergent adverse events are adverse events that started after the first dose of double-blind study drug and no more than 14 days (or 30 days for a serious adverse event) after the last dose of double-blind study drug.
At each clinic visit the investigator was required to document any occurrence of adverse events - including at specified visits abnormal laboratory, ECG and lung function test findings. Any event spontaneously reported by the participant or observed by the investigator was recorded, irrespective of the relation to study treatment.
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 | Double-Blind Period: Placebo | Namilumab-matching placebo solution (2 separate injections) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab-matching placebo, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hypertensive crisis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nasopharyngitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medical Director | Takeda | +1-877-825-3327 | trialdisclosures@takeda.com |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| C000624713 | namilumab |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Open label: Namilumab 80 mg | Experimental | Namilumab 80 mg subcutaneous injection, at Week 0 and every 4 weeks thereafter up to 52 weeks (active extension period) - if appropriate on the basis of treatment response. |
|
| Open label: Namilumab 150 mg | Experimental | Namilumab 150 mg, subcutaneous injection, from Week 8 and then every 4 weeks thereafter up to 52 weeks (active extension period) - if appropriate on the basis of treatment response. |
|
|
| Placebo | Drug | Placebo subcutaneous injection |
|
| Weeks 2, 4, 6 and 10 |
| Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving 50 Percent Reduction From Baseline PASI Score (PASI50 Response) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 50% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving 90 Percent Reduction From Baseline PASI Score (PASI90 Response) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 90% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 2 Point Improvement From Baseline in Static Physicians Global Assessment (sPGA) Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | sPGA for psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, plaque elevation and skin scaling across all psoriatic lesions. sPGA of psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). Participants who had >=2 point improvement are reported. | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving a sPGA Response of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | sPGA for psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, plaque elevation and skin scaling across all psoriatic lesions. sPGA of psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). 'Clear' and 'Almost clear' included all participants who had scored a 0 or 1. | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
| Change From Baseline in sPGA Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | sPGA for psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, plaque elevation and skin scaling across all psoriatic lesions. sPGA of psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Change From Baseline in Affected Body Surface Area (BSA) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was performed by means of the palm method, where the palm of the participant's hand represented 1% of BSA. The affected areas were then calculated by their size compared to the participant's palm. | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Change From Baseline in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Itching Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Participants were asked to indicate their level of itching by marking a horizontal line with "No itch" at the left extreme and "Worst itch imaginable" at the right extreme (scale ranging from 0 - 10, but not shown on the line). Each assessment was intended to capture the severity of itching experienced during the previous 24 hours. | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Change From Baseline in VAS Joint Pain Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Participants were asked to indicate their severity of joint pain by marking a horizontal line with "No pain" at the left extreme and "Worst pain imaginable" at the right extreme (scale ranging from 0 - 10, but not shown on the line). Each assessment was intended to capture the severity of pain experienced during the previous 24 hours. | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Change From Baseline in VAS Morning Stiffness Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Participants were asked to indicate their level of morning stiffness by marking a horizontal line with "No stiffness" at the left extreme and "Very severe stiffness" at the right extreme (scale ranging from 0 - 10, but not shown on the line). Each assessment was intended to capture the severity of stiffness experienced by the participant since waking on that particular day. | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Change From Baseline in Duration of Morning Stiffness at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Duration of stiffness was elicited in response to a standard question included in the portable device. | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score at Week 12 | The DLQI is a 10-point rating scale for determining the impact of dermatological conditions on the participant's quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). Maximum total score is 30, where 0-1 represents "No effect at all on participant's life" and 21-30 "Extremely large effect on participant's life" - higher scores indicating poorer quality of life. | Baseline, Week 12 |
| Change From Baseline in Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) at Week 12 | SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well-being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. These 8 aspects are summarized as physical and mental health summary scores. The score range for the physical and mental health scores is 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). | Baseline, Week 12 |
| Change From Baseline in EuroQoL Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D)- Index Score at Week 12 | EQ-5D-Index score is a generic, multidimensional, health-related, quality-of-life instrument. The profile allows participants to rate their health state in 5 health domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The score ranges from -0.594 to 1.000. The higher score indicates a better health state perceived by the participant. | Baseline, Week 12 |
| Change From Baseline in EQ-5D-VAS Score at Week 12 | EQ-5D-VAS is a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm ("Worst imaginable health state") to 100 mm ("Best imaginable health state"); higher scores indicate a better health state. | Baseline, Week 12 |
| Mean Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lunula, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
| Edmonton |
| Alberta |
| Canada |
| Barrie | Ontario | Canada |
| Hamilton | Ontario | Canada |
| Markham | Ontario | Canada |
| North Bay | Ontario | Canada |
| Peterborough | Ontario | Canada |
| Richmond Hill | Ontario | Canada |
| Waterloo | Ontario | Canada |
| Québec | Quebec | Canada |
| Lost to Follow-up |
|
| Withdrawal by Subject |
|
| Pregnancy |
|
| Lack of Efficacy |
|
| Other |
|
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
Namilumab 40 milligram (mg) injection (2 separate injections of 20 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 20 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| BG002 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 50 mg | Namilumab 100 mg injection (2 separate injections of 50 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 50 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| BG003 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 80 mg | Namilumab 160 mg injection (2 separate injections of 80 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 80 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| BG004 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 150 mg | Namilumab 300 mg injection (2 separate injections of 150 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 150 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| BG005 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized | Number | participants |
|
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized | Number | participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| Height | Mean | Standard Deviation | centimeter |
|
| Weight | Mean | Standard Deviation | kilogram |
|
| Body Mass Index | Mean | Standard Deviation | kilogram per square meter (kg/m^2) |
|
| Smoking Classification | Number | participants |
|
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| OG000 | Double-Blind Period: Placebo | Namilumab-matching placebo solution (2 separate injections) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab-matching placebo, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| OG001 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 20 mg | Namilumab 40 milligram (mg) injection (2 separate injections of 20 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 20 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| OG002 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 50 mg | Namilumab 100 mg injection (2 separate injections of 50 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 50 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| OG003 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 80 mg | Namilumab 160 mg injection (2 separate injections of 80 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 80 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
| OG004 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 150 mg | Namilumab 300 mg injection (2 separate injections of 150 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 150 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving 75 Percent Reduction From Baseline PASI Score (PASI75 Response) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 10 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 75% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Weeks 2, 4, 6 and 10 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving 50 Percent Reduction From Baseline PASI Score (PASI50 Response) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 50% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving 90 Percent Reduction From Baseline PASI Score (PASI90 Response) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | PASI is an assessment of psoriasis lesion severity and affected body area combined into single score. The body was divided into 4 sections: head (h), trunk (t), upper (u) and lower (l) extremities. For each section, percent body surface area (A) involved was estimated: 0= No involvement to 6= 90-100 percent (%). Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema (E), induration (I), and desquamation (D); scale: 0= no symptoms to 4= very marked. Final PASI = 0.1(Eh + Ih + Dh)Ah + 0.3(Et + It + Dt)At + 0.2(Eu + Iu + Du)Au + 0.4(El + Il + Dl)Al where head: 0.1, upper extremities (arms): 0.2, trunk: 0.3, lower extremities (legs): 0.4 (corresponding to approximately 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% of body surface area, respectively); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease. Participants showing at least 90% reduction in PASI score relative to baseline PASI Score are reported. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 2 Point Improvement From Baseline in Static Physicians Global Assessment (sPGA) Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | sPGA for psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, plaque elevation and skin scaling across all psoriatic lesions. sPGA of psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). Participants who had >=2 point improvement are reported. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants Achieving a sPGA Response of Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 | sPGA for psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, plaque elevation and skin scaling across all psoriatic lesions. sPGA of psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). 'Clear' and 'Almost clear' included all participants who had scored a 0 or 1. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in sPGA Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | sPGA for psoriasis is scored on a 6-point scale, reflecting a global consideration of the erythema, plaque elevation and skin scaling across all psoriatic lesions. sPGA of psoriasis scale ranges from 0 (clear) to 5 (very severe). | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Affected Body Surface Area (BSA) at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessment of BSA with psoriasis was performed by means of the palm method, where the palm of the participant's hand represented 1% of BSA. The affected areas were then calculated by their size compared to the participant's palm. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | percentage of total body surface area | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Itching Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Participants were asked to indicate their level of itching by marking a horizontal line with "No itch" at the left extreme and "Worst itch imaginable" at the right extreme (scale ranging from 0 - 10, but not shown on the line). Each assessment was intended to capture the severity of itching experienced during the previous 24 hours. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in VAS Joint Pain Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Participants were asked to indicate their severity of joint pain by marking a horizontal line with "No pain" at the left extreme and "Worst pain imaginable" at the right extreme (scale ranging from 0 - 10, but not shown on the line). Each assessment was intended to capture the severity of pain experienced during the previous 24 hours. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in VAS Morning Stiffness Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Participants were asked to indicate their level of morning stiffness by marking a horizontal line with "No stiffness" at the left extreme and "Very severe stiffness" at the right extreme (scale ranging from 0 - 10, but not shown on the line). Each assessment was intended to capture the severity of stiffness experienced by the participant since waking on that particular day. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Duration of Morning Stiffness at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | Assessments were performed using a portable electronic device, which was kept and used by the participant throughout the duration of the study. Duration of stiffness was elicited in response to a standard question included in the portable device. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | minutes | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score at Week 12 | The DLQI is a 10-point rating scale for determining the impact of dermatological conditions on the participant's quality of life (daily activities, personal relationships, symptoms and feelings, leisure, work and school, and treatment). Maximum total score is 30, where 0-1 represents "No effect at all on participant's life" and 21-30 "Extremely large effect on participant's life" - higher scores indicating poorer quality of life. | FAS where baseline and Week 12 assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Week 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) at Week 12 | SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well-being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. These 8 aspects are summarized as physical and mental health summary scores. The score range for the physical and mental health scores is 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning). | FAS where baseline and Week 12 assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Week 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in EuroQoL Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D)- Index Score at Week 12 | EQ-5D-Index score is a generic, multidimensional, health-related, quality-of-life instrument. The profile allows participants to rate their health state in 5 health domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The score ranges from -0.594 to 1.000. The higher score indicates a better health state perceived by the participant. | FAS where baseline and Week 12 assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Week 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in EQ-5D-VAS Score at Week 12 | EQ-5D-VAS is a participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm ("Worst imaginable health state") to 100 mm ("Best imaginable health state"); higher scores indicate a better health state. | FAS where baseline and Week 12 assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | millimeter (mm) | Baseline, Week 12 |
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Mean Change From Baseline in Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) Score at Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 | The NAPSI quantifies severity of nail psoriasis by evaluating the presence or absence of psoriatic manifestations on the nail matrix (pitting, leukonychia, red spots on lunula, crumbling) and nail bed (onycholysis, splinter hemorrhages, subungual hyperkeratosis, oil drop [salmon patch dyschromia]). Each finger nail divided with imaginary lines into quadrants and scored for both nail matrix and nail bed psoriasis (range from 0 [absence of psoriasis] to 4 [presence of psoriasis in all 4 quadrants]). The total NAPSI score equals the sum of scores for all of the finger nails evaluated and ranges from 0 to 80. Higher scores = more severe psoriasis. | FAS where baseline and specified post-baseline assessment were available. FAS included all randomized and treated participants who had at least one valid post-baseline assessment of PASI in the double-blind period. | Posted | Least Squares Mean | Standard Error | units on a scale | Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 12 |
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
| 24 |
| 5 |
| 24 |
| EG001 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 20 mg | Namilumab 40 milligram (mg) injection (2 separate injections of 20 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 20 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. | 0 | 24 | 0 | 24 |
| EG002 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 50 mg | Namilumab 100 mg injection (2 separate injections of 50 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 50 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. | 0 | 24 | 2 | 24 |
| EG003 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 80 mg | Namilumab 160 mg injection (2 separate injections of 80 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 80 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. | 0 | 25 | 3 | 25 |
| EG004 | Double-Blind Period: Namilumab 150 mg | Namilumab 300 mg injection (2 separate injections of 150 mg) subcutaneously on Day 1, followed by namilumab 150 mg, single injection, subcutaneously at Weeks 2, 6 and 10 during the double-blind period. | 0 | 25 | 2 | 25 |
| EG005 | Open-Label Period: Namilumab 80 mg | Namilumab 80 mg, single injection, subcutaneously, every 4 weeks for 52 weeks during the open-label period on the basis of treatment response. | 0 | 12 | 4 | 12 |
| EG006 | Open-Label Period: Namilumab 150 mg | Namilumab 150 mg, single injection, subcutaneously from Week 8 and then every 4 weeks for 52 weeks during the open-label period on the basis of treatment response. | 0 | 48 | 2 | 48 |
| EG007 | Follow-up Period: Placebo | Participants who received namilumab-matching placebo injections during the double-blind treatment were to be followed-up for 18 weeks after the last dose of study drug - whether administered in the double-blind period or open-label extension period. | 0 | 24 | 1 | 24 |
| EG008 | Follow-up Period: Namilumab 20 mg | Participants who received namilumab 20 mg injections during the double-blind treatment were to be followed-up for 18 weeks after the last dose of study drug - whether administered in the double-blind period or open-label extension period. | 0 | 24 | 0 | 24 |
| EG009 | Follow-up Period: Namilumab 50 mg | Participants who received namilumab 50 mg injections during the double-blind treatment were to be followed-up after the last dose of study drug - whether administered in the double-blind period or open-label extension period. | 0 | 24 | 0 | 24 |
| EG010 | Follow-up Period: Namilumab 80 mg | Participants who received namilumab 80 mg injections during the double-blind treatment were to be followed-up for 18 weeks after the last dose of study drug - whether administered in the double-blind period or open-label extension period. | 0 | 25 | 1 | 25 |
| EG011 | Follow-up: Namilumab 150 mg | Participants who received namilumab 150 mg injections during the double-blind treatment were to be followed-up for 18 weeks after the last dose of study drug - whether administered in the double-blind period or open-label extension period. | 0 | 25 | 1 | 25 |
| Upper respiratory tract infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Blood creatine phosphokinase increased | Investigations | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Toothache | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Limb injury | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Wound | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Hypertriglyceridaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA (18.0) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
The first study related publication will be a multi-center publication submitted within 24 months after conclusion or termination of a study at all sites. After such multi site publication, all proposed site publications and presentations will be submitted to sponsor for review 60 days in advance of publication. Site will remove Sponsor confidential information unrelated to study results. Sponsor can delay a proposed publication for another 60 days to preserve intellectual property.
| Week 4 (n= 24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Week 6 (n= 23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Week 10 (n= 22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Change at Week 2 (n=24, 24, 24, 25, 25) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. | MMRM | 0.279 | LS Mean Difference | 1.9 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.74 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.6 | 5.4 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. | MMRM | 0.085 | LS Mean Difference | 3.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.74 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.4 | 6.5 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. | MMRM | 0.110 | LS Mean Difference | 2.8 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.76 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.7 | 6.3 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 4 (n= 24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Week 6 (n= 23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Week 10 (n= 22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Week 12 (n= 23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
Week 12: CMH P-values are from a CMH Chi-Square test using a 2*2 contingency table of treatment and responder status controlling for visit. |
| Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel |
| 0.768 |
| Risk Difference (RD) |
| -0.036 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -0.269 |
| 0.198 |
Risk difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. |
| Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: CMH P-values are from a CMH Chi-Square test using a 2*2 contingency table of treatment and responder status controlling for visit. | Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel | 0.338 | Risk Difference (RD) | -0.112 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.330 | 0.106 | Risk difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: CMH P-values are from a CMH Chi-Square test using a 2*2 contingency table of treatment and responder status controlling for visit. | Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel | 0.890 | Risk Difference (RD) | -0.017 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.261 | 0.226 | Risk difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 4 (n= 24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Week 6 (n= 23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Week 10 (n= 22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Week 12 (n= 23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
| Week 4 (n= 24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Week 6 (n= 23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Week 10 (n= 22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Week 12 (n= 23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
Week 12: CMH P-values are from a CMH Chi-Square test using a 2*2 contingency table of treatment and sPGA response category controlling for visit. |
| Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel |
| 0.677 |
| Risk Difference (RD) |
| -0.040 |
| 2-Sided |
| 95 |
| -0.222 |
| 0.143 |
Risk difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. |
| Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: CMH P-values are from a CMH Chi-Square test using a 2*2 contingency table of treatment and sPGA response category controlling for visit. | Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel | 0.107 | Risk Difference (RD) | -0.130 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.268 | 0.007 | Risk difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: CMH P-values are from a CMH Chi-Square test using a 2*2 contingency table of treatment and sPGA response category controlling for visit. | Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel | 0.371 | Risk Difference (RD) | -0.080 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.248 | 0.087 | Risk difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 4 (n= 24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Week 6 (n= 23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Week 10 (n= 22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Week 12 (n= 23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
| Change at Week 2 (n=24, 24, 24, 25, 25) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.365 | LS Mean Difference | -0.2 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.18 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.5 | 0.2 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.757 | LS Mean Difference | 0.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.18 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.3 | 0.4 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.825 | LS Mean Difference | 0.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.18 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.4 | 0.3 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 2 (n=24, 24, 24, 25, 25) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=22, 22, 24, 24, 22) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.459 | LS Mean Difference | 1.59 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.143 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.65 | 5.84 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.094 | LS Mean Difference | 3.65 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.161 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.63 | 7.93 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.203 | LS Mean Difference | 2.78 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.173 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.52 | 7.09 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 2 (n=23, 23, 23, 25, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=23, 23, 23, 23, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=22, 22, 24, 22, 23) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=21, 21, 24, 22, 21) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=22, 20, 22, 17, 20) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.099 | LS Mean Difference | -1.15 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.692 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.53 | 0.22 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.396 | LS Mean Difference | -0.59 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.690 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.96 | 0.78 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.102 | LS Mean Difference | -1.15 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.697 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.54 | 0.23 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 2 (n=23, 23, 23, 25, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=23, 23, 23, 23, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=22, 21, 24, 22, 23) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=21, 21, 24, 22, 21) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=22, 20, 22, 17, 20) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.045 | LS Mean Difference | -1.26 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.619 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.49 | -0.03 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.118 | LS Mean Difference | -0.98 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.620 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.21 | 0.25 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.050 | LS Mean Difference | -1.22 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.616 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.44 | 0.00 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 2 (n=23, 23, 23, 25, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=23, 23, 23, 23, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=22, 21, 24, 22, 23) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=21, 21, 24, 22, 21) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=22, 20, 22, 17, 20) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.087 | LS Mean Difference | -0.86 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.497 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.85 | 0.13 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.580 | LS Mean Difference | -0.27 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.494 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.26 | 0.71 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.873 | LS Mean Difference | -0.08 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.496 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.06 | 0.90 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 2 (n=13, 16, 17, 17, 17) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=13, 16, 16, 16, 17) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=13, 13, 17, 14, 16) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=11, 15, 17, 15, 13) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=13, 14, 16, 12, 12) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.248 | LS Mean Difference | 7.9 | Standard Error of the Mean | 6.73 | 2-Sided | 95 | -5.7 | 21.4 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.914 | LS Mean Difference | 0.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 6.67 | 2-Sided | 95 | -12.7 | 14.2 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site, treatment, visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects, baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.523 | LS Mean Difference | 4.3 | Standard Error of the Mean | 6.74 | 2-Sided | 95 | -9.2 | 17.9 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 12 |
|
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.389 | LS Mean Difference | -1.2 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.36 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.9 | 1.5 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.316 | LS Mean Difference | -1.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.39 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.2 | 1.4 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.142 | LS Mean Difference | -2.1 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.41 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.9 | 0.7 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Physical Health Summary Score: Change at Week 12 |
|
| Mental Health Summary Score: Baseline |
|
| Mental Health Summary Score: Change at Week 12 |
|
| Physical Health Summary Score: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.863 | LS Mean Difference | -0.3 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.65 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.6 | 3.0 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Physical Health Summary Score: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.403 | LS Mean Difference | 1.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.67 | 2-Sided | 95 | -1.9 | 4.7 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Physical Health Summary Score: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.597 | LS Mean Difference | 0.9 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.74 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.5 | 4.4 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Mental Health Summary Score: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.416 | LS Mean Difference | 1.9 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.32 | 2-Sided | 95 | -2.7 | 6.5 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Mental Health Summary Score: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.770 | LS Mean Difference | 0.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.24 | 2-Sided | 95 | -3.8 | 5.1 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Mental Health Summary Score: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.798 | LS Mean Difference | 0.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.31 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.0 | 5.2 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Mental Health Summary Score: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.767 | LS Mean Difference | 0.7 | Standard Error of the Mean | 2.40 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.1 | 5.5 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 12 |
|
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.619 | LS Mean Difference | -0.02 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.042 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.10 | 0.06 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.597 | LS Mean Difference | 0.02 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.043 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.06 | 0.11 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.509 | LS Mean Difference | 0.03 | Standard Error of the Mean | 0.044 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.06 | 0.12 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 12 |
|
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.323 | LS Mean Difference | 4.8 | Standard Error of the Mean | 4.80 | 2-Sided | 95 | -4.8 | 14.4 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.697 | LS Mean Difference | -1.9 | Standard Error of the Mean | 4.89 | 2-Sided | 95 | -11.7 | 7.8 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from an ANCOVA model with main effect of study site and treatment with baseline value as a covariate. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | ANCOVA | 0.633 | LS Mean Difference | -2.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 5.10 | 2-Sided | 95 | -12.6 | 7.7 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Change at Week 2 (n=24, 24, 24, 25, 25) |
|
| Change at Week 4 (n=24, 24, 23, 24, 24) |
|
| Change at Week 6 (n=23, 23, 24, 24, 23) |
|
| Change at Week 10 (n=22, 22, 24, 24, 21) |
|
| Change at Week 12 (n=23, 21, 22, 19, 20) |
|
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site,treatment,visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects,baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.142 | LS Mean Difference | 2.4 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.62 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.8 | 5.6 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site,treatment,visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects,baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.015 | LS Mean Difference | 4.0 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.63 | 2-Sided | 95 | 0.8 | 7.3 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |
| Week 12: Post-baseline least squares means and p-values were from a MMRM model with main effect of study site,treatment,visit and interaction between visit and treatment as fixed effects,baseline value as a covariate with an unstructured covariance structure. Baseline least squares means and p-values were obtained using an ANOVA model with terms for treatment and study site. | MMRM | 0.121 | LS Mean Difference | 2.6 | Standard Error of the Mean | 1.64 | 2-Sided | 95 | -0.7 | 5.8 | LS mean difference (namilumab - placebo) and corresponding 95% confidence interval were reported. | Superiority or Other |