MedPath

A Study of Re-Treatment With MabThera (Rituximab) in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Had an Inadequate Response to a Single Anti-TNF Inhibitor.

Phase 3
Completed
Conditions
Rheumatoid Arthritis
Interventions
Registration Number
NCT00502840
Lead Sponsor
Hoffmann-La Roche
Brief Summary

This single arm study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of repeated courses of MabThera in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who have participated in ML19070, and have completed the week 24 visit. Eligible patients (DAS28 \>2.6 after week 24), will receive 2 infusions of 1g MabThera (Day 1 and day 15). For all patients in this extension study, up to 3 repeated courses of treatment are allowed. The anticipated time on study treatment is 1-2 years, and the target sample size is 100-500 individuals.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
193
Inclusion Criteria
  • adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis who participated in ML19070, and have completed the week 24 visit;
  • eligible for re-treatment (DAS28 >2.6 after week 24, swollen joint count >=4, tender joint count >=4).
Exclusion Criteria
  • patients who have withdrawn from treatment in ML19070 pre-week 16;
  • patients with a previous response in DAS28 <0.6 to MabThera after week 16;
  • concurrent treatment with any DMARD except for methotrexate, any TNF alpha inhibitor, or other biologic or investigational agent.

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
SINGLE_GROUP
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
1rituximab [MabThera/Rituxan]-
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Change From Baseline in DAS28 Score at Week 24Week 24

DAS28 calculated from the swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (PJC) using the 28 joints count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour \[mm/hour\]) and Patient Global Asessment of disease activity (participant- rated arthritis activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). A clinically meaningful improvement in DAS28 was defined as an improvement of 1.2 units.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
DAS28 Score by Treatment Course and Follow-up (FU) VisitScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

DAS28 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The DAS28 consists of SJC and TJC measurements, the ESR (measured in mm/hr), and Patient Global Asessment of disease activity (participant-rated arthritis activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity. DAS28 less than or equal to (≤)3.2 equals (=) low disease activity, DAS28 \>3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity.

Percentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response of 'Good' or 'Moderate' by Treatment CourseWeek 24

DAS28 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual response as none, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤3.2; moderate responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score \>3.2 to ≤5.1 or a change from baseline \>0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤5.1.

Patient's Global Assessment of Disease ActivityBaseline and Week 24

Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). Baseline was defined as the original baseline score from assessment performed in Study ML19070. Participants were to assess the disease activity on a 100-mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as "no disease activity" (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as "maximum disease activity" (maximum arthritis disease activity).

Patient's Assessment of PainBaseline and Week 24

Patient Assessment of Pain was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). Baseline was defined as the original baseline score from assessment performed in Study ML19070. Participants were to assess their current level of pain on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as "no pain" and the right-hand (100 mm) as "unbearable pain".

C-Reactive ProteinBaseline and Week 24

CRP measured in milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). Baseline was defined as the original baseline score from assessment performed in Study ML19070.

Erythrocyte Sedimentation RateBaseline and Week 24

ESR mean scores measured in mm/hr at was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). Baseline was defined as the original baseline score from assessment performed in Study ML19070.

Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR Category and Treatment CourseWeek 24

Response was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual response as none, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤3.2; moderate responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score \>3.2 to ≤5.1 or a change from baseline \>0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤5.1; non-responders had a change from baseline ≤0.6 or change from baseline \>0.6 and ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score \> 5.1.

Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score by Treatment CourseScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

HAQ-DI was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The HAQ-DI score consists of questions referring to 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common daily activities. For each of the categories, participants reported the amount of difficulty they had in performing 2 or 3 specific sub-category items. Each item scored on 4-point scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. The standard disability score was calculated from the 8 categories by dividing the sum of the individual categories by the number of categories answered ;total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty. The questionnaire was provided in a German translation and was scored based on the instructions from the Stanford University Medical Center.

Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) Score by Treatment CourseScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

FACIT-F was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The FACIT fatigue scale is based on a 13-item questionnaire to assess the therapy-induced fatigue. Participants scored each item on a 5-point scale: 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much). Larger the participant's response to the questions (with the exception of 2 negatively stated), greater was the participant's 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 (best) to 52 (worst). The assessment was originally developed for chronic illnesses and is now validated for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The questionnaire was provided in a German translation.

Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) by Treatment CourseScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and mental composite t-score (MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 MCS by Treatment CourseScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and MCS. The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - Physical FunctioningScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and MCS. The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - Bodily PainScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and MCS. The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - Physical Role FunctioningScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the physical and mental composite t-scores (PCS and MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - Emotional Role FunctioningScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the physical and mental composite t-scores (PCS and MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - Emotional Well-BeingScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and MCS. The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - Social FunctioningScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and MCS. The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - VitalityScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and MCS. The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

SF-36 Domain Scores by Treatment Course - General Heath PerceptionsScreening, FU Weeks 8, 16, and 24, and FU Months 9 and 12

SF-36 was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the PCS and MCS. The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50%, or 70% Improvement (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70) by Treatment Course24 weeks after each course

ACR response was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). ACR20/50/70 response: ≥20/50/70%, respectively, improvement in SJC or TJC and 20/50/70% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: 1) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 2) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 3) Patient's Assessment of Pain, 4) participants assessment of functional disability via HAQ-DI, and 5) C-reactive protein (CRP) or ESR at each visit.

Swollen Joint CountScreening and Week 24

Mean sum of 28 swollen joints was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The 28 joints to be assessed for swelling were shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints 1-5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of swollen joints ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.

Tender Joint CountScreening and Week 24

Mean sum of 28 tender joints was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). The 28 joints to be assessed for tenderness were shoulder, elbow, wrist, MCP joints 1-5, PIP joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of tender joints ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.

Physician's Global Assessment of Disease ActivityBaseline and Week 24

Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). Baseline was defined as the original baseline score from assessment performed in Study ML19070. Physicians were to assess the disease activity on a 100-mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as "no disease activity" (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as "maximum disease activity" (maximum arthritis disease activity).

Rheumatoid Factor (RF)Baseline and Week 24

RF measured in international units per milliliter (IU/mL) was assessed during follow-up at the specified timepoints following each course of treatment (participants could have received up to 3 courses of treatment with rituximab). Baseline was defined as the original baseline score from assessment performed in Study ML19070.

Trial Locations

Locations (51)

Rheumapraxis - Dres. Edmund Edelmann, Gerhard Straeßner und Hans Bloching

🇩🇪

Bad Aibling, Germany

Rheuma-Klinikum Bad Bramstedt Klinik fuer Rheumatologie und Immunologie

🇩🇪

Bad Bramstedt, Germany

Campus Charité Mitte Charité Centrum 12. Med.Klinik Abt.Rheumatologie u.Klin.Immunologie

🇩🇪

Berlin, Germany

Praxis Dr. Silke Zinke

🇩🇪

Berlin, Germany

Immanuel-Krankenhaus; Rheumklinik Berlin Buch

🇩🇪

Berlin, Germany

Ev. Waldkrankenhaus Spandau; Klinik für Innere Medizin

🇩🇪

Berlin, Germany

Ambulantes Rheumazentrum Dr.med. Helmut Sörensen

🇩🇪

Berlin, Germany

Universitätsklinikum Bonn Med. Klinik u.Poliklinik III

🇩🇪

Bonn, Germany

HELIOS Seehospital Sahlenburg Abt.Internist.Rheumatologie

🇩🇪

Cuxhaven, Germany

Praxis PD Dr. med. Ekkehard Röther

🇩🇪

Donaueschingen, Germany

Scroll for more (41 remaining)
Rheumapraxis - Dres. Edmund Edelmann, Gerhard Straeßner und Hans Bloching
🇩🇪Bad Aibling, Germany

MedPath

Empowering clinical research with data-driven insights and AI-powered tools.

© 2025 MedPath, Inc. All rights reserved.