Dose-finding Study of GLPG0634 as Monotherapy in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Participants (DARWIN2)
- Registration Number
- NCT01894516
- Lead Sponsor
- Galapagos NV
- Brief Summary
* Participants suffering from active rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to methotrexate were evaluated for improvement of disease activity (efficacy) when taking GLPG0634 as monotherapy (3 different doses - 50 milligram (mg), 100 mg and 200 mg once daily) or matching placebo for 24 weeks.
* During the course of the study, patients were also examined for any side effects that could occur (safety and tolerability), and the amount of GLPG0634 present in the blood (Pharmacokinetics) as well as the effects of GLPG0634 on disease- and mechanism of action-related parameters in the blood (Pharmacodynamics) were determined. Also, the effects of different doses of GLPG0634 administration on participants' disability, fatigue and quality of life were evaluated.
- Detailed Description
* Treatment duration was 24 weeks in total.
* However, at Week 12, all participants on placebo and the participants on the 50 mg dose who had not achieved 20% improvement in swollen joint count (SJC66) and tender joint count (TJC68) were assigned (automatically via interactive web response system (IWRS)) to 100 mg once daily (QD) in a blinded fashion and continued treatment until Week 24.
* Participants in the other groups maintained their randomized treatment until Week 24.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 287
-
male or female subjects who are ≥18 years of age on the day of signing informed consent,
-
have a diagnosis of RA since at least 6 months and meeting the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria of RA and ACR functional class I-III,
-
have ≥6 swollen joints (from a 66-joint count) and
≥8 tender joints (from a 68-joint count) at Screening and at Baseline,
-
Screening serum c-reactive protein ≥ 0.7 x upper limit of laboratory normal range (ULN),
-
have shown an inadequate response in terms of either lack of efficacy or toxicity to MTX,
-
have agreed to be washed out from MTX for a period of at least 4 weeks before or during the Screening period.
- current therapy with any non-biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD), with the exception of antimalarials, which must be at a stable dose for at least 12 weeks prior to Screening,
- current or previous RA treatment with a biologic DMARD, with the exception of biologic DMARDs: administered in a single clinical study setting, and; more than 6 months prior to Screening (12 months for rituximab or other B cell depleting agents), and; where the biologic DMARD was effective, and if discontinued, this should not be due to lack of efficacy,
- previous treatment at any time with a cytotoxic agent, other than MTX, before Screening.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description GLPG0634 200 mg QD GLPG0634 Participants received GLPG0634 200 mg capsules, orally, QD during Weeks 1 to 24. GLPG0634 50 mg QD GLPG0634 Participants received GLPG0634 50 mg capsules, orally, QD during Weeks 1 to 12. Participants who were responders (having at least 20% improvement on TJC68 and SJC66) remained on 50 mg QD while nonresponders were re-randomized to 100 mg QD during Weeks 13 to 24. Placebo Placebo Participants received GLPG0634 matching placebo capsules, orally, once daily (QD) during Weeks 1 to 12 and GLPG0634 100 milligram (mg) QD during Weeks 13 to 24. GLPG0634 100 mg QD GLPG0634 Participants received GLPG0634 100 mg capsules, orally, QD during Weeks 1 to 24.
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Percentage of Participants Achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 12 Week 12 The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response is a measurement of improvement in multiple disease assessment criteria. The ACR20 response is defined as: 1) ≥ 20% improvement from baseline in SJC66, and 2) ≥ 20% improvement from baseline in tender TJC68, and 3) ≥ 20% improvement from baseline in at least 3 of the following 5 items: 1. Pain visual analog scale (VAS) (taken from the Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index \[HAQ-DI\]), 2. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, 3. Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, 4. Total HAQ-DI score, and 5. CRP. Non-responder imputation was used (ie, to impute a missing response, the participant was assumed to be a non-responder).
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Percentage of Participants Achieving an ACR70 Response at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 ACR70 response: 1) ≥ 70% improvement from baseline in SJC66, and 2) ≥ 70% improvement from baseline in TJC68, and 3) ≥ 70% improvement from baseline in at least 3 of the following 5 items: 1. Pain VAS (taken from the HAQ-DI), 2. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, 3. Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, 4. Total HAQ-DI score, and 5. CRP. Non-responder imputation was used. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 The SDAI is the numerical sum of 5 outcome parameters: TJC28, SJC28, Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (in cm), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (in cm), and CRP (mg/dL). The SDAI was categorized as follows: • High disease activity: SDAI \> 26 • Moderate disease activity: 11 to 26 • Low disease activity: 3.3 to 11 • Remission: ≤ 3.3. LOCF algorithm was used. The SDAI total score ranges from 0 to approximately 86. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score 28 Joints Corrected for CRP (DAS28 (CRP)) European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 DAS28 (CRP) was categorized into EULAR response categories (none, moderate, good) as follows: None = Actual DAS28 (CRP) ≤ 3.2, \> 3.2 to ≤ 5.1, or \> 5.1 AND Improvement in DAS28 (CRP) from baseline ≤ 6.0 or \> 0.6 to ≤ 1.2; Moderate = Actual DAS28 (CRP) ≤ 3.2 AND Improvement in DAS28 (CRP) from baseline \> 0.6 to ≤ 1.2, Actual DAS28 (CRP) \> 3.2 to ≤ 5.1 or \> 5.1 AND Improvement in DAS28 (CRP) from baseline \> 1.2, or Actual DAS28 (CRP) \> 3.2 to ≤ 5.1 AND Improvement in DAS28 (CRP) from baseline \> 0.6 to ≤ 1.2; Good = Actual DAS28 (CRP) ≤ 3.2 AND Improvement in DAS28 (CRP) from baseline \> 1.2. LOCF algorithm was used. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR/EULAR Remission at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24 A participant's disease activity status can be defined as being in remission when scores on the TJC28, SJC28, CRP (actual value in mg/dL) and Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (cm) are all ≤ 1. Non-responder imputation was used. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 The CDAI is the SDAI modified to exclude CRP and is the sum of the 4 outcome parameters: TJC28, SJC28, Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (in cm), and Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (in cm). The CDAI was be categorized as follows: • High disease activity: \> 22 • Moderate disease activity: 10 to 22 • Mild disease activity: 2.8 to 10 • Remission: ≤ 2.8. LOCF algorithm was used. The CDAI total score ranges from 0 to approximately 76. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Percentage of Participants Achieving an ACR20 Response at Week 24 Week 24 ACR20 response was defined as: 1) ≥ 20% improvement from baseline in SJC66, and 2) ≥ 20% improvement from baseline in TJC68, and 3) ≥ 20% improvement from baseline in at least 3 of the following 5 items: 1. Pain VAS (taken from the HAQ-DI), 2. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, 3. Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS, 4. Total HAQ-DI score, and 5. CRP. Non-responder imputation was used.
Percentage of Participants Achieving an ACR50 Response at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 ACR50 response was defined as: 1) ≥ 50% improvement from baseline in SJC66, and 2) ≥ 50% improvement from baseline in TJC68, and 3) ≥ 50% improvement from baseline in at least 3 of the following 5 items: 1. Pain VAS (taken from the HAQ-DI) 2. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS 3. Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity VAS 4. Total HAQ-DI score 5. CRP. Non-responder imputation was used. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
ACR N% Improvement (ACR-N) Response at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 Weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 The ACR-N is the smallest percentage improvement in swollen and tender joints and the median of the remaining 5 core parameters, and is expected to be more sensitive to change than the ACR20, ACR50 or ACR70. It is a number varying between 0 and 100, with higher numbers indicating less severity of symptoms. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) algorithm was used (ie, to impute a missing value, the last preceding nonmissing value was used). All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) Scores at Weeks 4, 12, and 24 Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, and 24 The SF-36 is a 36-item questionnaire measuring 8 domains (physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health). Each domain score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), with higher scores reflecting better health-related functional status. Two summary scale scores were computed based on weighted combinations of the 8 domain scores: the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS). LOCF algorithm was used. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24 Baseline and Weeks 4, 12, and 24 FACIT-Fatigue scale is a 13-item questionnaire, each scored 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 that are scored reversely), the greater the fatigue. The sum of all responses resulted in the FACIT-Fatigue score for a total possible score of 0 (worse score) to 52 (better score), with a higher score indicating a better quality of life. LOCF algorithm was used. All placebo participants switched to GLPG0634 treatment at Week 12 and were not included in the analysis of Week 24.
Trial Locations
- Locations (82)
Little Rock Diagnostic Clinic
🇺🇸Little Rock, Arkansas, United States
Arizona Arthritis & Rheumatology Research PLLC
🇺🇸Mesa, Arizona, United States
C.V. Mehta MD Medical Corp.
🇺🇸Hemet, California, United States
Center for Innovative Therapy Division of Rheumatology, UCSD
🇺🇸La Jolla, California, United States
Desert Medical Advances
🇺🇸Palm Desert, California, United States
Infosphere Clinical Research, Inc.
🇺🇸West Hills, California, United States
Lovelace Scientific Resources
🇺🇸Venice, Florida, United States
The Arthritis Center
🇺🇸Springfield, Illinois, United States
Arthritis Center of North GA
🇺🇸Gainesville, Georgia, United States
Klein and Associates MD
🇺🇸Hagerstown, Maryland, United States
Private practice
🇺🇸Lansing, Michigan, United States
New Jersey Physicians, LLC
🇺🇸Clifton, New Jersey, United States
Arthritis Center of Reno
🇺🇸Reno, Nevada, United States
Arthritis Clinic
🇺🇸Jackson, Tennessee, United States
Pioneer Research Solutions Inc
🇺🇸Houston, Texas, United States
Altoona Center Clin Research
🇺🇸Duncansville, Pennsylvania, United States
Centro de Investigaciones Medicas Lanus
🇦🇷Lanus, Argentina
Instituto Centralizado de Asistencia e investigacion Clinica Integral
🇦🇷Rosario, Argentina
Centro Médico Privado de Reumatología
🇦🇷Tucuman, Argentina
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
🇦🇺Camperdown, Australia
Princess Alexandra Hospital
🇦🇺Woolloongabba, Australia
Rheumazentrum Favoriten
🇦🇹Wien, Austria
Clinic of Rheumatology MHAT
🇧🇬Sofia, Bulgaria
Hospital Regional "Guillermo Grant Benavente"
🇨🇱Concepcion, Chile
Fundación del Caribe para la Investigación Biomédica BIOS
🇨🇴Barranquilla, Colombia
Centro Integral de Reumatologia SAS
🇨🇴Bogota, Colombia
Cirei Sas
🇨🇴Bogota, Colombia
Preventive Care Ltda
🇨🇴Chia, Colombia
Schlossparkklinik - Akad. Lehrkrankenhaus Charite
🇩🇪Berlin, Germany
Schwerpunktpraxis fuer Rheumatologie
🇩🇪Hamburg, Germany
Reuma-Centro
🇬🇹Guatemala City, Guatemala
DRC
🇭🇺Balatonfüred, Hungary
Reuma S.A.
🇬🇹Guatemala City, Guatemala
Qualiclinic Ltd
🇭🇺Budapest, Hungary
L. Atikes doktorats
🇱🇻Liepaja, Latvia
Csolnoky Ferenc County Hospital
🇭🇺Veszprem, Hungary
Arké Estudios Clínicos S.A. de C.V.
🇲🇽Mexico, Mexico
"Bruninieku" Polyclinic
🇱🇻Riga, Latvia
Clinstile, S.A. de C.V.
🇲🇽Mexico, Mexico
Mexico Centre for Clinical Research
🇲🇽Mexico, Mexico
Hospital Universitario
🇲🇽Monterrey, Mexico
North Shore hospital
🇳🇿Auckland, New Zealand
IMSP Institutul de Cardiologie
🇲🇩Chisinau, Moldova, Republic of
Timaru Rheumatology Studies
🇳🇿Timaru, New Zealand
Silesiana Centrum Medyczne
🇵🇱Bytom, Poland
Centrum Kliniczno
🇵🇱Elblag, Poland
Medica Pro Familia Sp. z o.o. S.K.A.
🇵🇱Katowice, Poland
Nowomed
🇵🇱Krakow, Poland
NZOZ Przychodnia Lekarska "Eskulap"
🇵🇱Skierniewice, Poland
AMED Medical Center
🇵🇱Warsaw, Poland
Ars Rheumatica Sp. Z.o.o.
🇵🇱Warszawa, Poland
Wojewodzki Szpital Specjalistyczny we Wroclawiu
🇵🇱Wroclaw, Poland
Sana Medical Center
🇷🇴Bucuresti, Romania
Ianuli Med Consult SRL
🇷🇴Bucharest, Romania
Emergency County Hospital
🇷🇴Galati, Romania
Orenburg State Medical Academy
🇷🇺Orenburg, Russian Federation
GUZ "Regional Clinical Hospital"
🇷🇺Saratov, Russian Federation
Consorci Sanitari Parc Tauli
🇪🇸Sabadell, Spain
Vladimir Reg Clin Hosp
🇷🇺Vladimir, Russian Federation
V. Gusak Institute of Urgent and Recovery Surgery
🇺🇦Donetsk, Ukraine
Hospital General Elche
🇪🇸Elche, Spain
CICEC S.L.P Hospital Ntra.Sra.de la Esperanza
🇪🇸Santiago De Compostella, Spain
Central Outpatient Hospital of Deanyanskyy Distric
🇺🇦Kiev, Ukraine
Municipal Hospital
🇺🇦Kherson, Ukraine
Medicity S.A.S.
🇨🇴Bucaramanga, Colombia
Artho Care, Arthritis Care & Research P.C.
🇺🇸Gilbert, Arizona, United States
"Multiprofile Hospital for Active Treatment - Kaspela" LTD
🇧🇬Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Private Office
🇨🇱Temuco, Chile
Clinica Médica Especializada en Medicina Interna
🇬🇹Guatemala City, Guatemala
Centro Medico Dalinde
🇲🇽Mexico, Mexico
Hospital de Especialidades
🇲🇽Oaxaca, Mexico
City Hospital #8
🇺🇦Kharkiv, Ukraine
Regional Clinical Hospital
🇺🇦Vinnytsya, Ukraine
Spitalul Clinic Sfanta Maria
🇷🇴Bucuresti, Romania
Revita Clinic
🇭🇺Budapest, Hungary
NZOZ Medicus Bonus
🇵🇱Sroda Wielkopolska, Poland
Idearg S.A.S.
🇨🇴Bogota, Colombia
Nzoz "Dobry Lekarz"
🇵🇱Krakow, Poland
Arizona Arthritis Rheum Res
🇺🇸Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Low Country Rheumatology, PA
🇺🇸Charleston, South Carolina, United States
Health research of Oklahoma
🇺🇸Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States
Austin Rheumatology Research PA
🇺🇸Austin, Texas, United States