Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov
For full trial details, please see the original record at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01662063
Registration number
NCT01662063
Ethics application status
Date submitted
30/07/2012
Date registered
10/08/2012
Date last updated
12/10/2016
Titles & IDs
Public title
A Long-Term Extension Study of WA22762 and NA25220 of Subcutaneous (SC) Tocilizumab (TCZ) in Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)
Query!
Scientific title
A Multicenter Open-Label, Long-Term Extension Study of WA22762 and NA25220 to Evaluate Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Tocilizumab in Patients With Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
ML28338
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Rheumatoid Arthritis
0
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Musculoskeletal
0
0
0
0
Query!
Osteoarthritis
Query!
Inflammatory and Immune System
0
0
0
0
Query!
Rheumatoid arthritis
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Drugs - Tocilizumab
Experimental: SC TCZ QW - Participants who received IV TCZ in the previous trial will be switched to SC TCZ 162 mg QW, and those who received SC TCZ will continue at their same dosage of SC TCZ 162 mg QW. Tocilizumab will be given for an additional 96 weeks in this open-label extension study.
Experimental: SC TCZ Q2W - Participants who received SC TCZ will continue at their same dosage of SC TCZ 162 mg Q2W. Tocilizumab will be given for an additional 96 weeks in this open-label extension study.
Treatment: Drugs: Tocilizumab
TCZ will be given as 162 mg SC QW or Q2W for up to 96 weeks.
Query!
Intervention code [1]
0
0
Treatment: Drugs
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Number of Participants With at Least One Serious Adverse Event (SAE)
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Adverse events (AEs) were monitored throughout treatment. AEs were defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug regardless of causality. SAEs were defined as AEs that were fatal or life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, manifested as a congenital anomaly/birth defect, were medically significant, or required intervention to prevent any of the aforementioned outcomes. The number of participants with at least one SAE regardless of treatment relationship was reported.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
From Baseline to 8 weeks after last dose; assessed continuously during treatment (up to 96 weeks) and up to 8 weeks after last dose (up to 2 years overall)
Query!
Primary outcome [2]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With at Least One SAE
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
AEs were monitored throughout treatment. AEs were defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug regardless of causality. SAEs were defined as AEs that were fatal or life-threatening, required hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, manifested as a congenital anomaly/birth defect, were medically significant, or required intervention to prevent any of the aforementioned outcomes. The percentage of participants with at least one SAE regardless of treatment relationship was calculated.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
From Baseline to 8 weeks after last dose; assessed continuously during treatment (up to 96 weeks) and up to 8 weeks after last dose (up to 2 years overall)
Query!
Primary outcome [3]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a Positive Anti-TCZ Antibody Assay at Any Timepoint
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
Blood samples were collected to test for the presence of antibodies to TCZ. The percentage of participants with a positive anti-TCZ antibody assay was calculated.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
From Baseline to 8 weeks after last dose; assessed at Baseline; Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96; and up to 8 weeks after last dose (up to 2 years overall)
Query!
Primary outcome [4]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a Positive Anti-TCZ Antibody Assay at Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
Blood samples were collected to test for the presence of antibodies to TCZ. The percentage of participants with a positive anti-TCZ antibody assay was calculated.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Baseline
Query!
Primary outcome [5]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a Positive Anti-TCZ Antibody Assay Post-Baseline
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
Blood samples were collected to test for the presence of antibodies to TCZ. The percentage of participants with a positive anti-TCZ antibody assay was calculated. Positive assay results obtained post-Baseline were further investigated via confirmation assay and a neutralization assay.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
From Week 12 up to 8 weeks after last dose; assessed at Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96; and up to 8 weeks after last dose (up to 2 years overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Correctly Administered All SC TCZ Doses
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Compliance was assessed using drug dispensing logs, diary cards kept by the participant, and return records, as reviewed by the Investigator at regular visits. Total compliance up to the end of treatment was defined as the percentage of participants who correctly administered all scheduled doses of SC TCZ. Correct administration was defined as proper injection technique, injection of the correct amount (162 mg), device not left at room temperature for greater than (\>) 8 hours, and absence of other medication errors.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Disease Activity Score Based on 28 Joints (DAS28) Score
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
The DAS28 was calculated using the Swollen Joint Count (SJC), Tender Joint Count (TJC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the participant according to Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score. For the DAS28 formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-millimeter (mm) scale to a 10-point score. The DAS28 was calculated as (0.56 multiplied by \[×\] square root of TJC) + (0.28 × square root of SJC) + (0.7 × log natural \[ln\] ESR) + (0.014 × VAS). Scores may range from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate increased disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Change From Baseline in DAS28 Score
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
The DAS28 was calculated using the SJC, TJC, ESR, and Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the participant according to VAS score. For the DAS28 formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The DAS28 was calculated as (0.56 × square root of TJC) + (0.28 × square root of SJC) + (0.7 × ln ESR) + (0.014 × VAS). Scores may range from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate increased disease activity. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increase or worsening in disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Score
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
The CDAI was calculated using the SJC, TJC, and Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the patient and by the physician according to separate VAS scores. For the CDAI formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The CDAI was calculated as the sum of the component scores, that is, SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician). Scores may range from 0 to 76, where higher scores indicate increased disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Change From Baseline in CDAI Score
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
The CDAI was calculated using the SJC, TJC, and Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the patient and by the physician according to separate VAS scores. For the CDAI formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The CDAI was calculated as the sum of the component scores, that is, SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician). Scores may range from 0 to 76, where higher scores indicate increased disease activity. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increase or worsening in disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Score
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
The SDAI was calculated using the SJC, TJC, Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the patient and by the physician according to separate VAS scores, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) level. For the SDAI formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The SDAI was calculated as the sum of the component scores, that is, SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician) + hsCRP. Because the formula includes hsCRP, scores may theoretically range from 0 to infinity, where higher scores indicate increased disease activity. However, based upon normal hsCRP level within 1 milligram per deciliter (mg/dL), scores would be expected to fall within less than or equal to (=) 77 points.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Change From Baseline in SDAI Score
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
The SDAI was calculated using the SJC, TJC, Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the patient and by the physician according to separate VAS scores, and hsCRP level. For the SDAI formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The SDAI was calculated as the sum of the component scores, that is, SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician) + hsCRP. Because the formula includes hsCRP, scores may theoretically range from 0 to infinity, where higher scores indicate increased disease activity. However, based upon normal hsCRP level within 1 mg/dL, scores would be expected to fall within =77 points. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increase or worsening in disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Tender Joint Count (TJC) Score
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
Sixty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The number of tender joints was taken as the TJC score, where values may range from 0 to 68.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Change From Baseline in TJC Score
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
Sixty-eight joints were assessed and classified as tender/not tender by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The number of tender joints was taken as the TJC score, where values may range from 0 to 68. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increase in number of tender joints.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Swollen Joint Count (SJC) Score
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
Sixty-six joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The number of swollen joints was taken as the SJC score, where values may range from 0 to 66.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Change From Baseline in SJC Score
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
Sixty-six joints were assessed and classified as swollen/not swollen by pressure and joint manipulation on physical examination. The number of swollen joints was taken as the SJC score, where values may range from 0 to 66. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increase in number of swollen joints.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Number of Participants With a Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drug (DMARD) Dose Reduction, Interruption, or Discontinuation
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including non-biologic DMARDs, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in DMARD therapy was documented and reported among those participants receiving at least one DMARD at Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a DMARD Dose Reduction, Interruption, or Discontinuation
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including non-biologic DMARDs, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in DMARD therapy was documented and reported among those participants receiving at least one DMARD at Baseline.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Percentage of Reasons Given for DMARD Dose Reduction or Interruption
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including non-biologic DMARDs, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in DMARD therapy was documented and reported among those participants receiving at least one DMARD at Baseline. The reasons for any DMARD dose reduction/interruption =60 days were reported. More than one reason could be given for a single change in DMARD therapy, and each participant could also change DMARD therapy more than once. Therefore, the number of reasons could exceed the number of participants analyzed.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
0
0
Percentage of Reasons Given for DMARD Discontinuation
Query!
Assessment method [15]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including non-biologic DMARDs, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in DMARD therapy was documented and reported among those participants receiving at least one DMARD at Baseline. The reasons for any DMARD discontinuation were reported. More than one reason could be given for a single change in DMARD therapy, and each participant could also change DMARD therapy more than once. Therefore, the number of reasons could exceed the number of participants analyzed.
Query!
Timepoint [15]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
0
0
Number of Participants With a Corticosteroid (CCS) Dose Reduction, Interruption, or Discontinuation
Query!
Assessment method [16]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including CCS treatment, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in CCS therapy was documented and reported among those participants who received at least one CCS before the last dose of SC TCZ.
Query!
Timepoint [16]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a CCS Dose Reduction, Interruption, or Discontinuation
Query!
Assessment method [17]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including CCS treatment, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in CCS therapy was documented and reported among those participants who received at least one CCS before the last dose of SC TCZ.
Query!
Timepoint [17]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
0
0
Percentage of Reasons Given for CCS Dose Reduction
Query!
Assessment method [18]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including CCS treatment, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in CCS therapy was documented and reported among those participants who received at least one CCS before the last dose of SC TCZ. The reasons for any CCS dose reduction were reported. More than one reason could be given for a single change in CCS therapy, and each participant could also change CCS therapy more than once. Therefore, the number of reasons could exceed the number of participants analyzed.
Query!
Timepoint [18]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
0
0
Percentage of Reasons Given for CCS Dose Interruption
Query!
Assessment method [19]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including CCS treatment, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in CCS therapy was documented and reported among those participants who received at least one CCS before the last dose of SC TCZ. The reasons for any CCS dose interruption =14 days were reported. More than one reason could be given for a single change in CCS therapy, and each participant could also change CCS therapy more than once. Therefore, the number of reasons could exceed the number of participants analyzed.
Query!
Timepoint [19]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
0
0
Percentage of Reasons Given for CCS Discontinuation
Query!
Assessment method [20]
0
0
Use of concomitant medications, including CCS treatment, was recorded throughout the study. Any change in CCS therapy was documented and reported among those participants who received at least one CCS before the last dose of SC TCZ. The reasons for any CCS discontinuation \>14 days were reported. More than one reason could be given for a single change in CCS therapy, and each participant could also change CCS therapy more than once. Therefore, the number of reasons could exceed the number of participants analyzed.
Query!
Timepoint [20]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
0
0
Number of Participants Who Switched From the QW Regimen and Remained on the Q2W Regimen
Query!
Assessment method [21]
0
0
Participants could switch between regimens at the Investigator's judgment based upon safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data. The number of participants who switched from the QW to the Q2W regimen and did not return to the QW regimen was reported.
Query!
Timepoint [21]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
0
0
Percentage of Participants Who Switched From the QW Regimen and Remained on the Q2W Regimen
Query!
Assessment method [22]
0
0
Participants could switch between regimens at the Investigator's judgment based upon safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data. The percentage of participants who switched from the QW to the Q2W regimen and did not return to the QW regimen was calculated.
Query!
Timepoint [22]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
0
0
Number of Participants Who Returned to the QW Regimen After Switching to the Q2W Regimen
Query!
Assessment method [23]
0
0
Participants could switch between regimens at the Investigator's judgment based upon safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data. The number of participants who switched from the QW to the Q2W regimen and thereafter returned to the QW regimen was reported with the reason for returning to the QW regimen.
Query!
Timepoint [23]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
0
0
Time to Return to the QW Regimen After Switching to the Q2W Regimen
Query!
Assessment method [24]
0
0
Participants could switch between regimens at the Investigator's judgment based upon safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data. Time to return was defined as the time between switching to the Q2W regimen and returning to the previous QW regimen.
Query!
Timepoint [24]
0
0
From Baseline to last dose; assessed every 4 weeks during treatment (up to 96 weeks overall)
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
0
0
Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the Participant According to Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score
Query!
Assessment method [25]
0
0
The Global Assessment of Disease Activity was performed using a 100-mm horizontal VAS. Scores may range from 0 mm ("no disease activity") to 100 mm ("maximum disease activity"), with higher scores representing an increase in perceived symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [25]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Global Assessment of Disease Activity by the Participant According to VAS Score
Query!
Assessment method [26]
0
0
The Global Assessment of Disease Activity was performed using a 100-mm horizontal VAS. Scores may range from 0 mm ("no disease activity") to 100 mm ("maximum disease activity"), with higher scores representing an increase in perceived symptoms. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increase or worsening in perceived disease activity.
Query!
Timepoint [26]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
0
0
Global Assessment of Pain by the Participant According to VAS Score
Query!
Assessment method [27]
0
0
The Global Assessment of Pain was performed using a 100-mm horizontal VAS. Scores may range from 0 mm ("no pain") to 100 mm ("unbearable pain"), with higher scores representing an increase in pain.
Query!
Timepoint [27]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [28]
0
0
Change From Baseline in Global Assessment of Pain by the Participant According to VAS Score
Query!
Assessment method [28]
0
0
The Global Assessment of Pain was performed using a 100-mm horizontal VAS. Scores may range from 0 mm ("no pain") to 100 mm ("unbearable pain"), with higher scores representing an increase in pain. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increase or worsening in pain.
Query!
Timepoint [28]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [29]
0
0
Heath Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score
Query!
Assessment method [29]
0
0
The Stanford HAQ-DI was calculated as the average of 20 questions, each scored from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). The questionnaire included 8 component sets: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common activities. Overall scores may range from 0 to 3, with higher scores representing increased disability.
Query!
Timepoint [29]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [30]
0
0
Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score
Query!
Assessment method [30]
0
0
The Stanford HAQ-DI was calculated as the average of 20 questions, each scored from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). The questionnaire included 8 component sets: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common activities. Overall scores may range from 0 to 3, with higher scores representing increased disability. The change from Baseline to each visit was calculated, where positive changes represent an increased need for assistance with daily activities.
Query!
Timepoint [30]
0
0
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [31]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With HAQ-DI Score <0.5
Query!
Assessment method [31]
0
0
The Stanford HAQ-DI was calculated as the average of 20 questions, each scored from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). The questionnaire included 8 component sets: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common activities. Overall scores may range from 0 to 3, with higher scores representing increased disability. The percentage of participants achieving a score \<0.5 was calculated at each visit.
Query!
Timepoint [31]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [32]
0
0
Number of Participants With Low Disease Activity According to DAS28, SDAI, and CDAI Criteria
Query!
Assessment method [32]
0
0
Low disease activity was defined as DAS28 =3.2, SDAI =11, or CDAI =10. For each formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The DAS28 was calculated as (0.56 × square root of TJC) + (0.28 × square root of SJC) + (0.7 × ln ESR) + (0.014 × VAS), with potential scores from 0 to 10. The SDAI was calculated as SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician) + hsCRP, with potential scores from 0 to infinity. However, based upon normal hsCRP level within 1 mg/dL, scores would be expected to fall within =77 points. The CDAI was calculated as SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician), with potential scores from 0 to 76. For all instruments, higher scores indicate increased disease activity. The number of participants who met criteria for low disease activity was reported at each visit.
Query!
Timepoint [32]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [33]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Low Disease Activity According to DAS28, SDAI, and CDAI Criteria
Query!
Assessment method [33]
0
0
Low disease activity was defined as DAS28 =3.2, SDAI =11, or CDAI =10. For each formula, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The DAS28 was calculated as (0.56 × square root of TJC) + (0.28 × square root of SJC) + (0.7 × ln ESR) + (0.014 × VAS), with potential scores from 0 to 10. The SDAI was calculated as SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician) + hsCRP, with potential scores from 0 to infinity. However, based upon normal hsCRP level within 1 mg/dL, scores would be expected to fall within =77 points. The CDAI was calculated as SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician), with potential scores from 0 to 76. For all instruments, higher scores indicate increased disease activity. The percentage of participants who met criteria for low disease activity was calculated at each visit.
Query!
Timepoint [33]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [34]
0
0
Number of Participants With Remission According to DAS28, SDAI, and Boolean Criteria
Query!
Assessment method [34]
0
0
Remission was defined as DAS28 \<2.6, SDAI =3.3, or meeting all Boolean criteria (28-count SJC and TJC =1, VAS =10 mm, and hsCRP =1 mg/dL). For DAS28 and SDAI formulas, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The DAS28 was calculated as (0.56 × square root of TJC) + (0.28 × square root of SJC) + (0.7 × ln ESR) + (0.014 × VAS), with potential scores from 0 to 10. The SDAI was calculated as SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician) + hsCRP, with potential scores from 0 to infinity. However, based upon normal hsCRP level within 1 mg/dL, scores would be expected to fall within =77 points. For these instruments, higher scores indicate increased disease activity. The number of participants who met criteria for remission was reported at each visit.
Query!
Timepoint [34]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Secondary outcome [35]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With Remission According to DAS28, SDAI, and Boolean Criteria
Query!
Assessment method [35]
0
0
Remission was defined as DAS28 \<2.6, SDAI =3.3, or meeting all Boolean criteria (28-count SJC and TJC =1, VAS =10 mm, and hsCRP =1 mg/dL). For DAS28 and SDAI formulas, the SJC and TJC values were based upon 28 joints, and VAS was transformed from a 100-mm scale to a 10-point score. The DAS28 was calculated as (0.56 × square root of TJC) + (0.28 × square root of SJC) + (0.7 × ln ESR) + (0.014 × VAS), with potential scores from 0 to 10. The SDAI was calculated as SJC + TJC + VAS (participant) + VAS (physician) + hsCRP, with potential scores from 0 to infinity. However, based upon normal hsCRP level within 1 mg/dL, scores would be expected to fall within =77 points. For these instruments, higher scores indicate increased disease activity. The percentage of participants who met criteria for remission was calculated at each visit.
Query!
Timepoint [35]
0
0
Baseline and Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
* Completed the 97-week WA22762 (NCT01194414) or 96-week NA25220 (NCT01232569) core study on SC or IV TCZ and, based on the Investigator's judgment, may continue to benefit from TCZ treatment in this study investigating the SC formulation
* Receiving treatment on an outpatient basis
* Females of childbearing potential and males with female partners of childbearing potential must agree to use reliable means of contraception as defined by protocol
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
* Premature withdrawal from WA22762 (NCT01194414) or NA25220 (NCT01232569) core studies for any reason
* History of severe allergic or anaphylactic reactions to human, humanized, or murine monoclonal antibodies
* Evidence of serious uncontrolled concomitant disease or disorder
* Known active current or history of recurrent bacterial, viral, fungal, mycobacterial, or other infections
* Any major episode of infection requiring hospitalization or treatment with IV antibiotics within 4 weeks of Screening or oral antibiotics within 2 weeks of Screening
* History of or currently active primary or secondary immunodeficiency
* Oral corticosteroids at greater than (>) 10 mg per day prednisone or equivalent, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) above the maximum recommended dose
* Intra-articular or parenteral corticosteroids within 4 weeks prior to Baseline
* Treatment with any investigational or commercially available biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) other than TCZ at any time between completion of the core study WA22762 (NCT01194414) or NA25220 (NCT01232569) and enrollment in the long-term extension study
* Pregnant or breastfeeding women
* History of alcohol, drug, or chemical abuse within 1 year prior to Screening
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Non-randomised trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Query!
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Phase 3
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Query!
Data analysis
Query!
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Query!
Other reasons
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
1/08/2012
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
1/06/2014
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
218
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [1]
0
0
Alabama
Query!
Country [2]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [2]
0
0
Arizona
Query!
Country [3]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [3]
0
0
California
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Colorado
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Connecticut
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Florida
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
Georgia
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Idaho
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Illinois
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
Kansas
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
Louisiana
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
Maryland
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
Massachusetts
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Michigan
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Minnesota
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Mississippi
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
Missouri
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Nebraska
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
New Hampshire
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
New Jersey
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
New Mexico
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
New York
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
North Carolina
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Ohio
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Oklahoma
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Pennsylvania
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
South Carolina
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Tennessee
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Texas
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
Washington
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Puerto Rico
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
Ponce
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/industry
Query!
Name
Genentech, Inc.
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
This open-label extension study will evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of SC TCZ in participants with moderate to severe RA who have completed the 97-week WA22762 (NCT01194414) or 96-week NA25220 (NCT01232569) core studies on SC or intravenous (IV) TCZ. Participants will receive TCZ 162 milligrams (mg) SC every week (QW) or every 2 weeks (Q2W) for up to 96 weeks.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01662063
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Kivitz A, Wallace T, Olech E, Borofsky M, Devenport J, Pei J, Michalska M. Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneously Administered Tocilizumab for Adult Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Multicenter Phase 3b Long-term Extension Study. Rheumatol Ther. 2016 Dec;3(2):291-304. doi: 10.1007/s40744-016-0043-1. Epub 2016 Sep 24.
Query!
Public notes
This record is viewable in the ANZCTR as it had previously listed Australia and/or New Zealand as a recruitment site, however these sites have since been removed
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
0
0
Clinical Trials
Query!
Address
0
0
Genentech, Inc.
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
0
0
Query!
Address
0
0
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
No information has been provided regarding IPD availability
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Results publications and other study-related documents
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Results are available at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01662063
Download to PDF