MedPath

Comparing The Effectiveness And Safety Of 2 Doses Of An Experimental Drug, CP-690,550, To Methotrexate (MTX) In Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Not Previously Received MTX

Phase 3
Completed
Conditions
Arthritis, Rheumatoid
Interventions
Drug: Disease-modifying antirheumatic drug
Registration Number
NCT01039688
Lead Sponsor
Pfizer
Brief Summary

This study is designed to compare the effectiveness of the experimental drug, CP-690,550, to methotrexate in preventing joint damage and improving symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis. This study will also compare the safety of CP-690,550 with methotrexate.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
956
Inclusion Criteria
  • Adults with moderate to severe RA (Rheumatoid Arthritis) who have not been treated with methotrexate.
  • Diagnosis of RA based on the American College of Rheumatology 1987 revised criteria.
  • Active disease as defined by both >=6 tender or painful joints on motion and >= 6 joints swollen; and either an erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) > 28 mm or a C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration > 7 mg/dL
Exclusion Criteria
  • Blood dyscrasias including confirmed: Hemoglobin <9 g/dL or Hematocrit <30%; White blood cell count <3.0 x 109/L; Absolute neutrophil count <1.2 x 109/L; Platelet count <100 x 109/L
  • History of any other rheumatic autoimmune disease other than Sjogren's syndrome
  • No malignancy or history of malignancy
  • History of infection requiring hospitalization, parenteral antimicrobial therapy, or as otherwise judged clinically significant by the investigator, within the 6 months prior to the first dose of study drug
  • No chronic liver disease, recent or active hepatitis or other contraindication to methotrexate therapy

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
5 mg BID CP-690,550CP-690,550-
10 mg BID CP-690,550CP-690,550-
methotrexateDisease-modifying antirheumatic drug-
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) at Month 6Month 6

mTSS: sum of erosion and joint space narrowing (JSN) scores for 44 joints (16 per hand and 6 per foot). mTSS scores range from 0 (normal) to 448 (worst possible total score).

Change From Baseline at Month 6 in mTSSMonth 6

mTSS: sum of erosion and JSN scores for 44 joints (16 per hand and 6 per foot). mTSS scores range from 0 (normal) to 448 (worst possible total score). An increase in mTSS from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.

Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Month 6Month 6

ACR70 response: greater than or equal to (≥) 70 percent (%) improvement in tender joints count (TJC) or swollen joints count (SJC) and ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire \[HAQ\]), and 5) C-reactive protein (CRP).

Absolute Blood Pressure (BP) Values (mmHg)Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 24

BP: pressure exerted by the blood upon the walls of the blood vessels and especially arteries, usually measured on the radial artery using a sphygmomanometer. Systolic BP: the highest arterial blood pressure of a cardiac cycle occurring immediately after systole of the left ventricle of the heart. Diastolic BP: the lowest arterial blood pressure of a cardiac cycle occurring during diastole of the heart.

Change From Baseline in BP Values (mmHg)Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 24

BP: pressure exerted by the blood upon the walls of the blood vessels and especially arteries, usually measured on the radial artery using a sphygmomanometer. Systolic BP: the highest arterial blood pressure of a cardiac cycle occurring immediately after systole of the left ventricle of the heart. Diastolic BP: the lowest arterial blood pressure of a cardiac cycle occurring during diastole of the heart.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
mTSS Score at Baseline, Months 12 and 24Baseline, Months 12 and 24

mTSS: sum of erosion and JSN scores for 44 joints (16 per hand and 6 per foot). mTSS scores range from 0 (normal) to 448 (worst possible total score).

Percentage of Participants With no Progression in mTSS at Months 6, 12, and 24Months 6, 12, and 24

mTSS: sum of erosion and JSN scores for 44 joints (16 per hand and 6 per foot). mTSS scores range from 0 (normal) to 448 (worst possible total score). A increase of less than or equal to (≤)0.5 in mTSS is considered to be no progression in the mTSS.

Percentage of Participants With no Worsening in Erosion Score (Increase ≤0.5) at Months 6, 12, and 24Months 6, 12, and 24

Joint erosion score: erosion severity in 44 joints (16 per hand, 6 per foot). Each joint scored according to surface area involved, from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (extensive bone loss from more than one half of articulating bone). Because each side of foot joint was graded, maximum erosion score for foot joint was 10. Thus, maximum erosion score was 280. An increase of ≤0.5 in Erosion Score is considered to be 'no worsening' in the Erosion Score.

Erosion ScoresBaseline, Months 6, 12, and 24

Joint erosion score: erosion severity in 44 joints (16 per hand, 6 per foot). Each joint scored according to surface area involved, from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (extensive bone loss from more than one half of articulating bone). Because each side of foot joint was graded, maximum erosion score for foot joint was 10. Thus, maximum erosion score was 280.

Percentage of Participants Achieving an ACR50 ResponseMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

ACR50 response: ≥50% improvement in TJC or SJC and ≥50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of HAQ), and 5) CRP.

Tender Joints Count (TJC)Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Sixty-eight (68) joints were assessed by a blinded joint assessor to determine the number of joints considered tender or painful. The response to pressure/motion on each joint was assessed using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done/Not Applicable (to be used for artificial or missing joints). Artificial joints were not assessed. 68 joints to be assessed were: upper body (temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular); upper extremity: shoulder, elbow, wrist (radiocarpal, carpal and carpometacarpal considered as one unit), metacarpophalangeals (MCP I, II, III, IV, V), thumb interphalangeal (IP), proximal interphalangeals (PIP II, III, IV, V), distal interphalangeals (DIP II, III, IV, V); lower extremity: hip, knee, ankle, tarsus (includes subtalar, transverse tarsal and tarsometatarsal considered as one unit), metatarsophalangeals (MTP I, II, III, IV, V), great toe IP, proximal and distal interphalangeals combined (PIP II, III, IV, V).

Change From Baseline in mTSS Score at Months 12 and 24Months 12 and 24

mTSS: sum of erosion and JSN scores for 44 joints (16 per hand and 6 per foot). mTSS scores range from 0 (normal) to 448 (worst possible total score). An increase in mTSS from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression, and a decrease represents improvement.

Change From Baseline in TJCMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Sixty-eight (68) joints were assessed by a blinded joint assessor to determine the number of joints considered tender or painful. The response to pressure/motion on each joint was assessed using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done/Not Applicable (to be used for artificial or missing joints). Artificial joints were not assessed. 68 joints to be assessed were: upper body (temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular); upper extremity: shoulder, elbow, wrist (radiocarpal, carpal and carpometacarpal considered as one unit), MCP (I, II, III, IV, V), thumb IP, PIP (II, III, IV, V), DIP (II, III, IV, V); lower extremity: hip, knee, ankle, tarsus (includes subtalar, transverse tarsal and tarsometatarsal considered as one unit), MTP (I, II, III, IV, V), great toe IP, proximal and distal interphalangeals combined (PIP II, III, IV, V).

JSN ScoresBaseline, Months 6, 12, and 24

JSN score: severity of JSN in 42 joints (15 per hand and 6 per foot), including subluxation, scored from 0 (no/normal JSN) to 4 (complete loss of joint space, bony ankylosis, or luxation). Maximum JSN score was 168.

Change From Baseline in Erosion ScoresMonths 6, 12, and 24

Joint erosion score: erosion severity in 44 joints (16 per hand, 6 per foot). Each joint scored according to surface area involved, from 0 (no erosion) to 5 (extensive bone loss from more than one half of articulating bone). Because each side of foot joint was graded, maximum erosion score for foot joint was 10. Thus, maximum erosion score was 280. Change = score at observation minus score at Baseline. An increase in score from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression, and a decrease represented improvement.

Change From Baseline in JSN ScoresMonths 6, 12, and 24

JSN score: severity of JSN in 42 joints (15 per hand and 6 per foot), including subluxation, scored from 0 (no/normal JSN) to 4 (complete loss of joint space, bony ankylosis, or luxation). Maximum JSN score was 168. Change = scores at observation minus score at Baseline. An increase in score from baseline represented disease progression and/or joint worsening, no change represented halting of disease progression, and a decrease represented improvement.

Percentage of Participants Achieving an ACR70 ResponseMonths 1, 2, 3, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

ACR70 response: ≥70% improvement in TJC or SJC and ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of HAQ), and 5) CRP.

Percentage of Participants Achieving an ACR20 ResponseMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

ACR20 response: ≥20% improvement in TJC or SJC and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of HAQ), and 5) CRP.

Patient Assessment of Arthritis PainBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Participants rated the severity of arthritis pain on a 0 to 100 millimeter (mm) visual analogue scale (VAS), where 0 mm=no pain and 100 mm=most severe pain.

Physician Global Assessment of ArthritisBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm=very good and 100 mm=very bad.

Swollen Joints Count (SJC)Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Sixty-six (66) joints were assessed by a blinded joint assessor for swelling using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done/Not Applicable (to be used for artificial or missing joints). Artificial joints were not assessed. 66 joints assessed were: upper body (temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular); upper extremity: shoulder, elbow, wrist (radiocarpal, carpal and carpometacarpal considered as one unit), MCP (I, II, III, IV, V), thumb IP, PIP (II, III, IV, V), DIP (II, III, IV, V); lower extremity: knee, ankle, tarsus (includes subtalar, transverse tarsal and tarsometatarsal considered as one unit), MTP (I, II, III, IV, V), great toe IP, proximal and distal interphalangeals combined (PIP II, III, IV, V).

Change From Baseline in SJCMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Sixty-six (66) joints were assessed by a blinded joint assessor for swelling using the following scale: Present/Absent/Not Done/Not Applicable (to be used for artificial or missing joints). Artificial joints were not assessed. 66 joints assessed were: upper body (temporomandibular, sternoclavicular, acromioclavicular); upper extremity: shoulder, elbow, wrist (radiocarpal, carpal and carpometacarpal considered as one unit), MCP (I, II, III, IV, V), thumb IP, PIP (II, III, IV, V), DIP (II, III, IV, V); lower extremity: knee, ankle, tarsus (includes subtalar, transverse tarsal and tarsometatarsal considered as one unit), MTP (I, II, III, IV, V), great toe IP, proximal and distal interphalangeals combined (PIP II, III, IV, V).

Change From Baseline in Physician Global Assessment of ArthritisMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm=very good and 100 mm=very bad.

Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment of ArthritisMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Participants answered: "Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, how are you feeling today?" Participants responded by using a 0 - 100 mm VAS where 0=very well and 100=very poorly.

Change From Baseline in CRPMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Change from Baseline in CRP measured in mg/L.

Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count and C-Reactive Protein (3 Variables) (DAS28-3) CRPBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3(CRP) less than or equal to (≤)3.2 implied low disease activity, greater than (\>)3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-3(CRP) less than (\<)2.6 = remission.

Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (4 Variables) (DAS28-4 [ESR])Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (millimeter/hour \[mm/hour\]) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4(ESR) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-4(ESR) \<2.6 = remission.

Change From Baseline in DAS28-3(CRP)Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3(CRP) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-3(CRP) \<2.6 = remission.

Change From Baseline in Patient Assessment of Arthritis PainMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Participants rated the severity of arthritis pain on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, where 0 mm=no pain and 100 mm=most severe pain.

Patient Global Assessment of ArthritisBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Participants answered: "Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, how are you feeling today?" Participants responded by using a 0 - 100 mm VAS where 0=very well and 100=very poorly.

C-Reactive ProteinBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

CRP measured in milligrams per liter (mg/L)

Change From Baseline in DAS28-4(ESR)Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4(ESR) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-4(ESR) \<2.6 = remission.

Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3(CRP) ≤3.2Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3(CRP) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-3(CRP) \<2.6 = remission.

Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4(ESR) ≤3.2Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4(ESR) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-4(ESR) \<2.6 = remission.

Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3(CRP) <2.6Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3(CRP) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-3(CRP) \<2.6 = remission.

Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4(ESR) <2.6Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4(ESR) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-4(ESR) \<2.6 = remission.

Percentage of Participants With DAS28-3(CRP) Response (Good or Moderate Improvement)Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28 categorical responses define a good (absolute: \<3.2 or \>1.2 improvement from baseline \[BL\]), moderate (absolute: 3.2-5.1 or 0.6-1.2 change from BL), or no response (absolute: \>5.1 or \<0.6 change from BL).

Percentage of Participants With Consecutive Visits of DAS28-4(ESR) <2.6 by Number of Consecutive VisitsMonths 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28-4(ESR) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-4(ESR) \<2.6 = remission.

Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI ScoreMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom, arise, eat, walk, hygiene, common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty, 1=some difficulty, 2=much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. Any activity that requires assistance from another individual or requires the use of an assistive device adjusts to a minimum score of 2 to represent a more limited functional status. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3: 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty.

Percentage of Participants With at Least 0.3 Improvement in HAQ-DI ScoreMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom, arise, eat, walk, hygiene, common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty, 1=some difficulty, 2=much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. Any activity that requires assistance from another individual or requires the use of an assistive device adjusts to a minimum score of 2 to represent a more limited functional status. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3: 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty.

Percentage of Participants With at Least 0.5 Improvement in HAQ-DIMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom, arise, eat, walk, hygiene, common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty, 1=some difficulty, 2=much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. Any activity that requires assistance from another individual or requires the use of an assistive device adjusts to a minimum score of 2 to represent a more limited functional status. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3: 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty.

Short Form 36 (SF-36) Mental Component ScoreBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning) and is reported as 2 summary scores; physical component score and mental component score. Total score range for the summary scores = 0-100, where higher score represents higher level of functioning.

Percentage of Participants With DAS28-4(ESR) Response (Good or Moderate Improvement)Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-4(ESR) was calculated from SJC and TJC using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score=more disease activity. DAS28 categorical responses define a good (absolute: \<3.2 or \>1.2 improvement from BL), moderate (absolute: 3.2-5.1 or 0.6-1.2 change from BL), or no response (absolute: \>5.1 or \<0.6 change from BL).

Percentage of Participants With an ACR70 Response Sustained at Least 6 MonthsMonths 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

ACR70 response: ≥70% improvement in TJC or SJC and ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of HAQ), and 5) CRP.

Percentage of Participants With Consecutive Visits of ACR20 Response by Number of Consecutive VisitsMonths 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

ACR20 response: ≥20% improvement in TJC or SJC and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of HAQ), and 5) CRP.

Percentage of Participants With Consecutive Visits of ACR50 Response by Number of Consecutive VisitsMonths 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

ACR50 response: ≥50% improvement in TJC or SJC and ≥50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of HAQ), and 5) CRP.

Percentage of Participants With Consecutive Visits of ACR70 Response by Number of Consecutive VisitsMonths 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

ACR70 response: ≥70% improvement in TJC or SJC and ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: 1) physician's global assessment of disease activity, 2) participant's assessment of disease activity, 3) participant's assessment of pain, 4) participant's assessment of functional disability (disability index of HAQ), and 5) CRP.

Percentage of Participants With Consecutive Visits of DAS28-3(CRP) <2.6 by Number of Consecutive VisitsMonths 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

DAS28-3(CRP) was calculated from the SJC and TJC using 28-joints count and CRP (mg/L). Total score range: 0 to approximately 10, higher score indicated more disease activity. DAS28-3(CRP) ≤3.2 implied low disease activity, \>3.2 to 5.1 implied moderate disease activity, \>5.1 implied high disease activity, and DAS28-3(CRP) \<2.6 = remission.

SF-36 Domain ScoresBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).

Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)Baseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom, arise, eat, walk, hygiene, common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty, 1=some difficulty, 2=much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. Any activity that requires assistance from another individual or requires the use of an assistive device adjusts to a minimum score of 2 to represent a more limited functional status. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3: 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty.

Percentage of Participants With at Least 0.22 Improvement in HAQ-DI ScoreMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

HAQ-DI: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks in 8 categories of daily living activities: dress/groom, arise, eat, walk, hygiene, common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0-3: 0=no difficulty, 1=some difficulty, 2=much difficulty, and 3=unable to do. Any activity that requires assistance from another individual or requires the use of an assistive device adjusts to a minimum score of 2 to represent a more limited functional status. Overall score was computed as sum of domain scores and divided by number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3: 0=least difficulty and 3=extreme difficulty.

SF-36 Physical Component ScoreBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning) and is reported as 2 summary scores; physical component score and mental component score. Total score range for the summary scores = 0-100, where higher score represents higher level of functioning.

Change From Baseline in SF-36 Physical Component ScoreMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning) and is reported as 2 summary scores; physical component score and mental component score. Total score range for the summary scores = 0-100, where higher score represents higher level of functioning.

Change From Baseline in SF-36 Domain ScoresMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning).

Work Limitation Questionnaire (WLQ) ScoreBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (5-items); Physical Demands scale (6-item); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (9-items); Output Demands scale (5-items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time).

Change From Baseline in WLQ ScoresMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (5 items); Physical Demands scale (6 items); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (9 items); Output Demands scale (5 items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time).

WLQ Work Loss Index ScoreBaseline and Months 3, 6, and 12

WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (5-items); Physical Demands scale (6-item); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (9-items); Output Demands scale (5-items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time). Work Loss Index, which represented percentage of lost work over time period relative to a normative population, was derived (total score:0 \[no loss\] to 100 \[complete loss of work\]).

Change From Baseline in WLQ Work Loss Index ScoreMonths 3, 6, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

WLQ: participant-reported 25-item scale to evaluate degree to which health problems interfere with an ability to perform job roles along 4 dimensions: Time Management scale (5-items); Physical Demands scale (6-item); Mental-Interpersonal Demands Scale (9-items); Output Demands scale (5-items). All the scales ranged from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time). Work Loss Index, which represented percentage of lost work over time period relative to a normative population, was derived (total score:0 \[no loss\] to 100 \[complete loss of work\]).

Change From Baseline in SF-36 Mental Component ScoreMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning) and is reported as 2 summary scores; physical component score and mental component score. Total score range for the summary scores = 0-100, where higher score represents higher level of functioning.

European Quality of Life (EuroQol) Five Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health State Profile Utility ScoreBaseline and Months 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24

EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state ("confined to bed"). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.

Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Health State Profile Utility ScoreMonths 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24

EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Health State Profile component assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state ("confined to bed"). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.

Work Productivity and Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) at Baseline and Months 3 and 6Baseline and Months 3 and 6

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during last 3 months for direct, indirect medical cost domains. Direct cost: visit to doctor, non-medical practitioner, nursing home, hospital, surgery, emergency room (ER) treatment, diagnostic tests, overnight stay, home healthcare services, aids/devices used. Indirect costs associated with functional disability: employment status, willingness to work, work disability due to RA, sick leave, part time work, ability to perform chores, chores done by family/friends/housekeeper. Assessment was based on 0 to 2-point scale; higher score=higher medical cost.

Work Productivity and Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during last 3 months for direct, indirect medical cost domains. Direct cost: visit to doctor, non-medical practitioner, nursing home, hospital, surgery, ER treatment, diagnostic tests, overnight stay, home healthcare services, aids/devices used. Indirect costs associated with functional disability: employment status, willingness to work, work disability due to RA, sick leave, part time work, ability to perform chores, chores done by family/friends/housekeeper. Assessment was based on 0 to 2-point scale; higher score=higher medical cost.

Number of Events Including Visits, Surgeries, Tests or Devices as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Baseline and Months 3 and 6Baseline and Months 3 and 6

RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA/non-RA related number of events including visits to doctor, non-medical practitioner, hospital ER treatment, hospitalizations, number of surgeries, diagnostic tests, and devices/aids used were reported.

Number of Events Including Visits, Surgeries, Tests or Devices as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA/non-RA related number of events including visits to doctor, non-medical practitioner, hospital ER treatment, hospitalizations, number of surgeries, diagnostic tests, and devices/aids used were reported.

Number of Days as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Baseline and Months 3 and 6Baseline and Months 3 and 6

RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of days spent in hospital, nursing home, aids/devices used, on sick leave, work per week, performed part time work, performed paid work, chores done by housekeeper and chores done by family/friends.

Number of Days as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of days spent in hospital, nursing home, aids/devices used, on sick leave, work per week, performed part time work, performed paid work, chores done by housekeeper and chores done by family/friends.

Number of Hours Per Day as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Baseline and Months 3 and 6Baseline and Months 3 and 6

RA-HCRU assessed healthcare (HC) usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of hours spent per day for home healthcare services, chores done by housekeeper, chores done by family or friends, work done, and work missed were reported.

Number of Hours Per Day as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of hours spent per day for home healthcare services, chores done by housekeeper, chores done by family or friends, work done, and work missed were reported.

Work Performance in Past 3 Months on Days Bothered as Assessed Using RA-HCRUBaseline, Months 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24

Work performance of participants on number of days bothered was based on a 0 to 10-point scale, where higher score indicated lower work performance.

Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and HCRU at Months 3 and 6Months 3 and 6

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during last 3 months for direct, indirect medical cost domains. Direct cost: visit to doctor, non-medical practitioner, nursing home, hospital, surgery, ER treatment, diagnostic tests, overnight stay, home healthcare services, aids/devices used. Indirect costs associated with functional disability: employment status, willingness to work, work disability due to RA, sick leave, part time work, ability to perform chores, chores done by family/friends/housekeeper. Assessment was based on 0 to 2-point scale; higher score=higher medical cost.

Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and HCRU at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during last 3 months for direct, indirect medical cost domains. Direct cost: visit to doctor, non-medical practitioner, nursing home, hospital, surgery, ER treatment, diagnostic tests, overnight stay, home healthcare services, aids/devices used. Indirect costs associated with functional disability: employment status, willingness to work, work disability due to RA, sick leave, part time work, ability to perform chores, chores done by family/friends/housekeeper. Assessment was based on 0 to 2-point scale; higher score=higher medical cost.

Change From Baseline in Number of Events Including Visits, Surgeries, Tests or Devices as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 3 and 6Months 3 and 6

RA-HCRU assessed healthcare usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA/non-RA related number of events including visits to doctor, non-medical practitioner, hospital ER treatment, hospitalizations, number of surgeries, diagnostic tests, and devices/aids used were reported.

Change From Baseline in Number of Events Including Visits, Surgeries, Tests or Devices as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA/non-RA related number of events including visits to doctor, non-medical practitioner, hospital ER treatment, hospitalizations, number of surgeries, diagnostic tests, and devices/aids used were reported.

Change From Baseline in Number of Days as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 3 and 6Months 3 and 6

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of days spent in hospital, nursing home, aids/devices used, on sick leave, work per week, performed part time work, performed paid work, chores done by housekeeper and chores done by family/friends.

Change From Baseline in Number of Days as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of days spent in hospital, nursing home, aids/devices used, on sick leave, work per week, performed part time work, performed paid work, chores done by housekeeper and chores done by family/friends.

Change From Baseline in Number of Hours Per Day as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 3 and 6Months 3 and 6

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of hours spent per day for home HC services, chores done by housekeeper, chores done by family or friends, work done and work missed were reported.

Change From Baseline in Number of Hours Per Day as Assessed Using RA-HCRU at Months 12, 18, and 24Months 12, 18, and 24

RA-HCRU assessed HC usage during previous 3 months for direct or indirect medical cost domains. Any RA or non-RA related number of hours spent per day for home HC services, chores done by housekeeper, chores done by family or friends, work done and work missed were reported.

Change From Baseline in Work Performance in Past 3 Months on Days Bothered as Assessed Using RA-HCRUMonths 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24

Work performance of participants on number of days bothered was based on a 0 to 10-point scale, where higher score indicated lower work performance.

Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Baseline and Months 1, 2, and 3Baseline and Months 1, 2, and 3

Participant-rated 12 item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week. 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath, sleep adequacy, somnolence (range: 0-100); sleep quantity (range: 0-24), optimal sleep (yes or no). 9-item index measures of sleep disturbance provide composite scores: sleep problem summary, overall sleep problem. Except Adequacy, Optimal, Quantity of sleep, higher cores=more impairment. Scores transformed (actual raw score \[RS\] minus lowest possible score divided by possible RS range\*100); total score range: 0-100, higher score=more intensity of attribute.

Percentage of Participants With Optimal Sleep Assessed Using MOS-SSMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24

MOS-SS: participant-rated 12 item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week. It included 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath, sleep adequacy, somnolence, sleep quantity and optimal sleep. Participants responded whether their sleep was optimal or not by choosing yes or no. Number of participants with optimal sleep are reported

Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) at Months 6, 12, 18, and 24Months 6, 12, 18, and 24

Participant-rated 12 item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week. 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath, sleep adequacy, somnolence (range: 0-100); sleep quantity (range: 0-24), optimal sleep (yes or no). 9-item index measures of sleep disturbance provide composite scores: sleep problem summary, overall sleep problem. Except Adequacy, Optimal, Quantity of sleep, higher cores=more impairment. Scores transformed (actual raw score \[RS\] minus lowest possible score divided by possible RS range\*100); total score range: 0-100, higher score=more intensity of attribute.

Change From Baseline in MOS-SS at Months 1, 2, and 3Months 1, 2, and 3

Participant-rated 12 item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week. 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath, sleep adequacy, somnolence (range: 0-100); sleep quantity (range: 0-24), optimal sleep (yes or no). 9-item index measures of sleep disturbance provide composite scores: sleep problem summary, overall sleep problem. Except Adequacy, Optimal, Quantity of sleep, higher cores=more impairment. Scores transformed (actual raw score \[RS\] minus lowest possible score divided by possible RS range\*100); total score range: 0-100, higher score=more intensity of attribute.

Change From Baseline in MOS-SS at Months 6, 12, 18, and 24Months 6, 12, 18, and 24

Participant-rated 12 item questionnaire to assess constructs of sleep over past week. 7 subscales: sleep disturbance, snoring, awakened short of breath, sleep adequacy, somnolence (range: 0-100); sleep quantity (range: 0-24), optimal sleep (yes or no). 9-item index measures of sleep disturbance provide composite scores: sleep problem summary, overall sleep problem. Except Adequacy, Optimal, Quantity of sleep, higher cores=more impairment. Scores transformed (actual raw score \[RS\] minus lowest possible score divided by possible RS range\*100); total score range: 0-100, higher score=more intensity of attribute.

Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue ScaleBaseline and Months 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24

FACIT-Fatigue is a 13-item questionnaire. Participant scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as 4 minus the participant's response. The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). A higher score reflected an improvement in the participant's health status

Change From Baseline in FACIT-Fatigue ScaleMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24

FACIT-Fatigue is a 13-item questionnaire. Participant scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Very much). The larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), the greater the fatigue. For all questions, except for the 2 negatively stated ones, the code was reversed and a new score was calculated as 4 minus the participant's response. The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score). A higher score reflected an improvement in the participant's health status

Change From Baseline in Heart RateMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24
Change From Baseline in TemperatureMonths 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24

Trial Locations

Locations (173)

Manitoba Clinic

🇨🇦

Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

University of California Los Angeles (UCLA)

🇺🇸

Los Angeles, California, United States

Mountain State Clinical Research

🇺🇸

Clarksburg, West Virginia, United States

USC Keck School of Medicine

🇺🇸

Los Angeles, California, United States

Keck Hospital of USC

🇺🇸

Los Angeles, California, United States

Southeastern Arthritis Center

🇺🇸

Gainesville, Florida, United States

West Broward Rheumatology Associates, Inc.

🇺🇸

Tamarac, Florida, United States

Sundsvalls sjukhus- Medicinkliniken

🇸🇪

Sundsvall, Sweden

University of California San Diego Center for Innovative Therapy

🇺🇸

La Jolla, California, United States

CCBR Brasil Centro de Pesquisas e Analises Clinicas Ltda

🇧🇷

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

MOBAL "D-r Stefan Cherkezov" AD, Revmokardiologichno otdelenie s intenziven sektor

🇧🇬

Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria

Keck Hospital of USC, Lower Level Pharmacy

🇺🇸

Los Angeles, California, United States

Little Rock Diagnostic Clinic

🇺🇸

Little Rock, Arkansas, United States

University of California San Diego Perlman Ambulatory Clinic

🇺🇸

La Jolla, California, United States

Catalina Pointe Clinical Research, Inc.

🇺🇸

Tucson, Arizona, United States

Clinical Pharmacology Study Group

🇺🇸

Worcester, Massachusetts, United States

Centro de Reumatologia y Ortopedia

🇨🇴

Barranquilla, Atlantico, Colombia

Universitair Ziekenhuis Gent - Reumatologie

🇧🇪

Gent, Belgium

The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Department of Rheumatology

🇦🇺

Woodville, South Australia, Australia

Emeritus Research

🇦🇺

Malvern East, Victoria, Australia

Sarasota Arthritis Research Center

🇺🇸

Sarasota, Florida, United States

Medical Associates Clinic, PC

🇺🇸

Dubuque, Iowa, United States

Arthritis Clinic

🇺🇸

Jackson, Tennessee, United States

Schlosspark-Klinik

🇩🇪

Berlin, Germany

Privat-Praxis, Rheumatologie (P515)

🇩🇪

Aachen, Germany

Hospital Regional de Rancagua

🇨🇱

Rancagua, Chile

Hospital Cima San Jose

🇨🇷

San Jose, Costa Rica

Seoul National University Hospital, Rheumatology, Internal Medicine

🇰🇷

Seoul, Korea, Republic of

Revmatologicky ustav

🇨🇿

Praha 2, Czechia

Fakultni nemocnice Brno

🇨🇿

Brno, Czechia

Rheumaforschung - Studienambulanz Dr. Wassenberg

🇩🇪

Ratingen, Germany

Schoen Klinik Hamburg-Eilbek, Abt. Rheumatologie und Klin. Immunologie

🇩🇪

Hamburg, Germany

Revmacentrum MUDr. Mostera, s.r.o.

🇨🇿

Brno - Zidenice, Czechia

Fakultni nemocnice Hradec Kralove

🇨🇿

Hradec Kralove, Czechia

Asan Medical Center, Rheumatology, Internal Medicine

🇰🇷

Seoul, Korea, Republic of

Timaru Hospital, Clinical Trials Unit

🇳🇿

Timaru, New Zealand

Revmatologicka ambulance

🇨🇿

Praha 4, Czechia

Rheumatic Disease Clinic

🇮🇳

Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital, Rheumatology, Internal Medicine

🇰🇷

Seoul, Korea, Republic of

Schwerpunktpraxis Rheumatologie FAE Innere Medizin

🇩🇪

Halle, Germany

Skanes Universitetssjukhus i Malmo

🇸🇪

Malmo, Sweden

Sunway Medical Centre

🇲🇾

Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia

Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena

🇪🇸

Sevilla, Spain

Smolensk State Medical Academy, Clinical Research Centre of Diagnostic Medicine and Drugs

🇷🇺

Smolensk, Russian Federation

Centre for Clinical Research and Effective Practice (CCREP Middlemore Hospital

🇳🇿

Otahuhu, Auckland, New Zealand

Shalby Hospital

🇮🇳

Ahmedabad, India

State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education

🇷🇺

Ekaterinburg, Russian Federation

Centro Medico Corpac

🇵🇪

Lima, Peru

St. Petersburg State Institution of Healthcare Consultative-diagnostic Center #85

🇷🇺

St. Petersburg, Russian Federation

Rayuma Klinik, OPD Department, Jose R. Reyes Memorial Medical Center

🇵🇭

Manila, Philippines

Hospital Civil. Hospital Regional Universitario Carlos Haya

🇪🇸

Malaga, Spain

Ryburns Building, Waikato Hospital

🇳🇿

Hamilton, New Zealand

Centrum Leczenia Chorob Cywilizacyjnych Sp. z.o.o. SKA Oddzial Gdynia

🇵🇱

Gdynia, Poland

Reumatolog s.r.o.

🇸🇰

Bratislava, Slovakia

AAGS, s.r.o. , nestatne zdravotnicke zariadenie

🇸🇰

Dunajska Streda, Slovakia

Taichung Veterans General Hospital

🇨🇳

Taichung, Taiwan

Municipal Establishment "City Clinical Hospital #9 n.a. O.I. Minakov", Department of Rheumatology

🇺🇦

Odesa, Ukraine

Vinnitsa Regional Clinical Hospital n.a. M.I. Pirogov

🇺🇦

Vinnitsa, Ukraine

The Canterbury Geriatric Medical Research Trust, c/- The Princess Margaret Hospital

🇳🇿

Christchurch, New Zealand

Almazov Federal Heart, Blood and Endocrinology Centre

🇷🇺

Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation

Hospital de Basurto

🇪🇸

Bilbao, Vizcaya, Spain

Synexus SCM Sp. z o.o. Oddzial Warszawa

🇵🇱

Warszawa, Poland

Edificio Parra

🇵🇷

Ponce, Puerto Rico

State Institution "Republican Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine"

🇺🇦

Kyiv, Ukraine

Akademiska sjukhuset, Reumatologmottagningen

🇸🇪

Uppsala, Sweden

Scientific Research Institute of Clinical and Experimental Lymphology of the Siberian Branch of RAMS

🇷🇺

Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University

🇹🇭

Bangkok, Thailand

Ponce School of Medicine

🇵🇷

Ponce, Puerto Rico

Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Maranon

🇪🇸

Madrid, Spain

State Healthcare Institution Regional Clinical Hospital

🇷🇺

Barnaul, Russian Federation

The Center for Rheumatology and Bone Research

🇺🇸

Wheaton, Maryland, United States

Investigational Drug Service

🇺🇸

Seattle, Washington, United States

Virginia Mason Medical Center

🇺🇸

Seattle, Washington, United States

Rheumatology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Phramongkutklao Hospital

🇹🇭

Phayathai, Bangkok, Thailand

Center for Arthritis and Rheumatic Diseases

🇺🇸

Miami, Florida, United States

Diagnostic Rheumatology and Research, PC

🇺🇸

Indianapolis, Indiana, United States

Lynn Health Science Institute

🇺🇸

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States

Rheumatology Research Associates Ltd.

🇨🇦

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

State Healthcare Institution Regional Clinical Hospital for War Veterans

🇷🇺

Kemerovo, Russian Federation

State Health Institution City Hospital # 25, City Rheumatology Center of St. Petersburg

🇷🇺

St. Petersburg, Russian Federation

State Healthcare Institution City Hospital # 40 of Administrative Health Resort District

🇷🇺

St. Petersburg, Russian Federation

Regional State Healthcare Institution of Tomsk Regional Clinical Hospital

🇷🇺

Tomsk, Russian Federation

Clinical Hospital #122 named after L.G. Sokolov of the Federal Medical-Biological Agency

🇷🇺

St. Petersburg, Russian Federation

Revita Reumatologiai Rendelo

🇭🇺

Budapest, Hungary

MAV Korhaz es Rendelointezet

🇭🇺

Szolnok, Hungary

Instituto Peruano del Hueso y la Articulacion SAC-Privado-Lima/Centro de Investigacion IPHAR

🇵🇪

Lima, Peru

Brokenshire Integrated Health Ministries, Inc. Brokenshire Memorial Hospital

🇵🇭

Davao City, Philippines

Przychodnia Medyczna Lekarskiej Spoldzielni Pracy

🇵🇱

Gdynia, Poland

Rheumatology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Rajavithi Hospital

🇹🇭

Bangkok, Thailand

Southeastern Integrated Medical, PL dba Florida Medical Research

🇺🇸

Gainesville, Florida, United States

Southeastern Imaging and Diagnostics

🇺🇸

Gainesville, Florida, United States

The Center for Rheumatology

🇺🇸

Albany, New York, United States

PMG Research of Hickory, LLC

🇺🇸

Hickory, North Carolina, United States

Clinical Research Center of Reading, LLP

🇺🇸

Wyomissing, Pennsylvania, United States

West Tennessee Research Institute

🇺🇸

Jackson, Tennessee, United States

Austin Rheumatology Research

🇺🇸

Austin, Texas, United States

University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth

🇺🇸

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

United Hospital Center (Imaging Only)

🇺🇸

Clarksburg, West Virginia, United States

Consultorios Reumatológicos Pampa

🇦🇷

Buenos Aires, Argentina

Rheumatology Research Unit Sunshine Coast

🇦🇺

Maroochydore, Queensland, Australia

Clinica de Raios X Nabyh Salum S/S - Clinica Sao Matheus

🇧🇷

Goiania, GO, Brazil

Hospital Sao Lucas da PUCRS

🇧🇷

Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

Revmatologichno Otdelenie, MBAL - Plovdiv

🇧🇬

Plovdiv, Bulgaria

MBAL-Ruse, AD, IV Terapevtichno i kardiologichno otdelenie

🇧🇬

Ruse, Bulgaria

MBAL Sveti Ivan Rilski Sofia; Klinika po Revmatologia

🇧🇬

Sofia, Bulgaria

DKTs "Sveta Anna", Sofia; Konsultativen kabinet po Revmatologia

🇧🇬

Sofia, Bulgaria

Burlington Rheumatology and Osteoporosis Clinic

🇨🇦

Burlington, Ontario, Canada

Office of Dr. Fernando Bianchi

🇨🇦

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

MAC Research Inc.

🇨🇦

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

KW Musculoskeletal Research Inc.

🇨🇦

Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

Clinical Research and Arthritis Centre

🇨🇦

Windsor, Ontario, Canada

Estudios Clinicos V Region

🇨🇱

Vina del Mar, V Region, Chile

Centro de Estudios Reumatologicos

🇨🇱

Santiago, RM, Chile

Consulta Privada Dra. Marta Aliste

🇨🇱

Santiago, RM, Chile

Centro Integral de Reumatologia e Inmunologia CIREI

🇨🇴

Bogota, Cundinamarca, Colombia

Arztpraxis, Internist - Rheumatologie

🇩🇪

Nuernberg, Germany

Schwerpunktpraxis fuer Rheumatologie

🇩🇪

Rheine, Germany

Studienambulanz, Medizinische Klinik 3 Universitaetsklinikum Erlangen

🇩🇪

Erlangen, Germany

Mahavir Hospital & Research Center

🇮🇳

Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India

Mozgasszervi Rehabilitacios Kozpont, Reumatologiai szakrendeles

🇭🇺

Mezokovesd, Hungary

Synexus Magyarorszag Kft.

🇭🇺

Budapest, Hungary

Arthritis Research and Care Foundation

🇮🇳

Pune, Maharashtra, India

Shirdi Sai Hospital

🇮🇳

Bangalore, Karnataka, India

Jehangir Clinical Development Centre Pvt. Ltd.

🇮🇳

Pune, Maharashtra, India

Instituto Jaliscience de Investigación Clínica SA de CV

🇲🇽

Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico

Sarawak General Hospital

🇲🇾

Kuching, Malaysia

Hospital Universitario Jose Eleuterio Gonzalez

🇲🇽

Monterrey, Nuevo LEON, Mexico

Hospital Nacional IV Alberto Sabogal Sologuren

🇵🇪

Callao, Peru

Clinica Anglo Americana

🇵🇪

Lima, Peru

Centrum Leczenia Chorob Cywilizacyjnych Sp. z o.o. SKA Oddzial Katowice

🇵🇱

Katowice, Poland

State Healthcare Institution

🇷🇺

Ekaterinburg, Russian Federation

Ltd. Medical Association "Novaya Bolnitsa" (X-Ray Only)

🇷🇺

Ekaterinburg, Russian Federation

Federal State Institution named after Academician E.N. Meshalkin, Novosibirsk State Research

🇷🇺

Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University

🇨🇳

Kaohsiung, Taiwan

National Cheng Kung University Hospital

🇨🇳

Tainan, Taiwan

CRI "Clinical Territorial Medical Association "University Clinic", Department of Rheumatology

🇺🇦

Simferopol, Crimea, Ukraine

Saint Dennis Medical Group S.A.

🇦🇷

Buenos Aires, Argentina

Metroplex Clinical Research Center

🇺🇸

Dallas, Texas, United States

AAIR Research Center

🇺🇸

Rochester, New York, United States

CEPIC - Centro Paulista de Investigacao Clinica e Servicos Medicos Ltda

🇧🇷

Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil

Physician Research Collaboration, LLC

🇺🇸

Lincoln, Nebraska, United States

Altoona Center for Clinical Research

🇺🇸

Duncansville, Pennsylvania, United States

CIP - Centro Internacional de Pesquisas

🇧🇷

Goiania, GO, Brazil

OMI - Organización Médica de Investigación

🇦🇷

Buenos Aires, Argentina

Centro de Estudos em Terapias Inovadoras

🇧🇷

Curitiba, PR, Brazil

MBAL na Voennomeditsinska Akademia - Sofia, Klinika po Revmatologia i Kardiologia

🇧🇬

Sofia, Bulgaria

Centro de Reumatología y Osteoporosis, Cartago

🇨🇷

Cartago, Costa Rica

Chong Hua Hospital

🇵🇭

Cebu City, Philippines

Reumatologicka ambulancia, Ecclesia, s.r.o.

🇸🇰

Nove Zamky, Slovakia

Department of Rheumatology

🇮🇳

Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India

Servimed E.U

🇨🇴

Bucaramanga, Santander, Colombia

Hospital Nuestra Señora de La Esperanza

🇪🇸

Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain

Patricia Alvarez Site

🇩🇴

Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic

Drug Research Center Kft. Reumatologiai Szakrendeles

🇭🇺

Balatonfüred, Hungary

Unidad de Enfermedades Reumaticas y Cronico Degenerativas SC

🇲🇽

Torreon, Coahuila, Mexico

Narodny ustav reumatickych chorob

🇸🇰

Piestany, Slovakia

Nestatna reumatologicka ambulancia

🇸🇰

Zilina, Slovakia

Hospital Tuanku Ja'afar

🇲🇾

Seremban, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia

Consulta Privada Dra. Lucia Ponce

🇨🇱

Temuco, IX Region, Chile

Rheuma Medicus - Specjalistyczne Centrum Reumatologii i Osteoporozy

🇵🇱

Warszawa, Poland

PerCuro Clinical Research Ltd.

🇨🇦

Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

Unidad de Investigacion en Enfermedades Cronico Degenerativas

🇲🇽

Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico

Municipal City Clinical Hospital #4, Department of Rheumatology

🇺🇦

Lviv, Ukraine

Medical University of South Carolina

🇺🇸

Charleston, South Carolina, United States

Bernard F. Germain, MD

🇺🇸

Tampa, Florida, United States

Louisiana State University Health Sciences

🇺🇸

New Orleans, Louisiana, United States

Medical University of South Carolina - Rheumatology

🇺🇸

Charleston, South Carolina, United States

Medical University of South Carolina Investigational Drug Services

🇺🇸

Charleston, South Carolina, United States

Burnette & Silverfield, MDS PLC

🇺🇸

Tampa, Florida, United States

Dr. William G. Bensen Medicine Professional Corporation

🇨🇦

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Rheumatology Research Associates

🇨🇦

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Niagara Peninsula Arthritis Centre

🇨🇦

St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada

Windsor Radiological Associates

🇨🇦

Windsor, Ontario, Canada

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath