Trial Outcomes & Findings for A Long Term Study of the Safety of Tanezumab When Administered By Subcutaneous Injections (NCT NCT00994890)
NCT ID: NCT00994890
Last Updated: 2021-05-13
Results Overview
An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 112 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.
TERMINATED
PHASE2
679 participants
Baseline up to 112 days after last dose of study medication (up to 345 days)
2021-05-13
Participant Flow
Due to United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) imposed clinical hold, study was terminated prematurely and a maximum of only 4 doses of the 7 planned doses of tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) subcutaneous injection were administered in the study.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
231
|
222
|
226
|
|
Overall Study
Treated
|
230
|
222
|
226
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
231
|
222
|
226
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
Adverse Event
|
13
|
9
|
11
|
|
Overall Study
Lack of Efficacy
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
|
Overall Study
Lost to Follow-up
|
6
|
1
|
3
|
|
Overall Study
No longer willing to participate
|
8
|
5
|
13
|
|
Overall Study
Protocol Violation
|
2
|
4
|
0
|
|
Overall Study
Study terminated by sponsor
|
199
|
201
|
197
|
|
Overall Study
Randomized, but not treated
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
|
Overall Study
Other
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
Baseline Characteristics
A Long Term Study of the Safety of Tanezumab When Administered By Subcutaneous Injections
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Total
n=678 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Customized
18 to 44 years
|
11 Participants
n=39 Participants
|
7 Participants
n=41 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=35 Participants
|
22 Participants
n=31 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
45 to 64 years
|
128 Participants
n=39 Participants
|
124 Participants
n=41 Participants
|
113 Participants
n=35 Participants
|
365 Participants
n=31 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
Greater than or equal to (>=) 65 years
|
91 Participants
n=39 Participants
|
91 Participants
n=41 Participants
|
109 Participants
n=35 Participants
|
291 Participants
n=31 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
152 Participants
n=39 Participants
|
157 Participants
n=41 Participants
|
161 Participants
n=35 Participants
|
470 Participants
n=31 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
78 Participants
n=39 Participants
|
65 Participants
n=41 Participants
|
65 Participants
n=35 Participants
|
208 Participants
n=31 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline up to 112 days after last dose of study medication (up to 345 days)Population: Intent to treat (ITT) analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to 112 days after last dose that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
AEs
|
158 Participants
|
169 Participants
|
181 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
SAEs
|
17 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
20 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 50Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Laboratory analysis included blood chemistry, hematology, urinalysis and pregnancy test.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=221 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Laboratory Abnormalities
|
136 Participants
|
121 Participants
|
130 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 50Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
All standard intervals (PR, QRS, QT, QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula \[QTcF\], QT interval corrected for heart rate using Bazett's formula \[QTcB\], RR intervals and heart rate) were analyzed. Participants with abnormal ECG findings reported as adverse events were presented.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
Atrioventricular block first degree
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
Bundle branch block right
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
Supraventricular extrasystoles
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
Supraventricular tachycardia
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
Tachycardia
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
ECG QRS complex prolonged
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
ECG T wave abnormal
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Abnormal Electrocardiogram (ECG) Findings
ECG T wave inversion
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'Number Analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group, respectively.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=229 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 2
Baseline
|
2.04 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.93
|
1.52 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.17
|
1.76 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.53
|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 2
Change at Week 2
|
-0.43 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.51
|
-0.36 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.04
|
-0.23 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.78
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 4Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=218 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=215 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=218 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 4
|
-0.35 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.72
|
-0.15 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.12
|
-0.10 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.83
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 8Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=215 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=216 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=216 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 8
|
-0.39 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.10
|
-0.08 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.30
|
-0.34 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.14
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=188 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=207 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=203 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 16
|
-0.60 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.24
|
-0.17 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.66
|
-0.24 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.61
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 24Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=161 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=176 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=165 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 24
|
-0.46 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.14
|
-0.38 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.53
|
-0.19 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.44
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 32Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=81 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=90 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=91 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 32
|
-0.72 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.15
|
-0.11 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.26
|
-0.34 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.02
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 40Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=22 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=23 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=27 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 40
|
-0.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.11
|
-0.39 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.41
|
0.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.98
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 48Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Results are not reported for Tanezumab 5 mg group because all participants in this group had discontinued the study before Week 48.
NIS: 74-item, assess cranial nerves, muscle weakness, reflexes, sensation; scored separately for left, right limbs (37 items for each). Cranial nerves included 5 items (3rd nerve, 6th nerve, facial weakness, palate weakness, tongue weakness), muscle weakness included 19 items (respiratory,neck flexion, shoulder abduction, elbow flexion, brachioradialis,elbow extension, wrist flexion,wrist extension,finger flexion,finger spread,thumb abduction,hip flexion,hip extension,knee flexion,knee extension,ankle dorsiflexors,ankle plantar flexors,toe extensors,toe flexors), each item scored on scale 0=normal to 4=paralysis, higher score=greater weakness. Reflexes included 5 items (quadriceps femoris, triceps surae, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, brachioradialis), sensation included 4 items each for great toe and index finger (touch pressure, pin prick, vibration, joint position), each item scored as 0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent. Total NIS score range 0-244, higher score=greater impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=1 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=1 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 48
|
-2.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation NA
Standard deviation was not estimable since only 1 participant was evaluable in this group.
|
—
|
0.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation NA
Standard deviation was not estimable since only 1 participant was evaluable in this group.
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 50Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
Physical examination included examination of abdomen, ears, extremities, eyes, head, heart, lungs, lymph nodes, neck, nose, skin, throat, thyroid, muscoskeletal, neurological and peripheral vascular system.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Change From Baseline in Physical Findings
|
13 Participants
|
13 Participants
|
18 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Day 1Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at any time point.
Human serum ADA samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using the semi-quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=215 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=213 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=208 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) at Day 1
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 8Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at any time point.
Human serum ADA samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using the semi-quantitative ELISA.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=206 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=204 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=203 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) at Week 8
|
1 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 24Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at any time point.
Human serum ADA samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using the semi-quantitative ELISA.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=78 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=93 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=82 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) at Week 24
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 50Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at any time point.
Human serum ADA samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using the semi-quantitative ELISA.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=171 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=176 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=172 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) at Week 50
|
3 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 50Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
Examination of vital signs included body temperature, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse rate and respiratory rate. Participants with abnormal vital sign findings reported as adverse events were presented.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Vital Sign Abnormalities
Blood pressure increased
|
0 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Vital Sign Abnormalities
Hypertension
|
8 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Vital Sign Abnormalities
Hypotension
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Day 1Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Day 1
|
9 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 2Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=221 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=218 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=219 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Week 2
|
7 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 4Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=219 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=212 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=218 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Week 4
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 8Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=186 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=191 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=192 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Week 8
|
4 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 16Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=107 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=123 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=113 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Week 16
|
2 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 24Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=54 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=67 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=64 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Week 24
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 32Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=31 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=28 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=32 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Week 32
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 40Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure.
Assessment of the injection-site reactions were based on presence of erythema (redness), induration (swelling), ecchymosis (bruising), pruritus (itching) and pain that occurred after the injection had been administered (not related to pain of needle insertion).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=11 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=11 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=12 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Injection-Site Reactions at Week 40
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis in index knee or index hip during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 to 10, where higher scores indicated higher pain.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 16
|
-2.18 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.25
|
-2.85 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.32
|
-2.71 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.15
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Baseline
|
6.35 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.48
|
6.48 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.56
|
6.30 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.48
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 2
|
-2.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.02
|
-1.97 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.18
|
-1.61 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.00
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 4
|
-2.43 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.11
|
-2.68 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.15
|
-2.50 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.02
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 8
|
-2.20 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.14
|
-2.76 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.25
|
-2.71 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.14
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 24
|
-2.16 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.29
|
-2.84 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.31
|
-2.69 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.17
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 32
|
-2.15 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.26
|
-2.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.32
|
-2.66 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.14
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
WOMAC physical function subscale is a 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to osteoarthritis in index joint and index hip during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions scored on NRS of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicated worse function. Total score range for WOMAC physical function subscale score was 0 to 10, where higher scores indicated worse function.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=223 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Baseline
|
6.49 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.54
|
6.58 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.55
|
6.47 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.53
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 2
|
-2.10 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.01
|
-2.13 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.15
|
-1.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.96
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 4
|
-2.50 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.16
|
-2.70 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.22
|
-2.64 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.09
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 8
|
-2.29 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.10
|
-2.83 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.26
|
-2.80 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.23
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 16
|
-2.28 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.20
|
-2.89 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.35
|
-2.84 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.22
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 24
|
-2.26 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.23
|
-2.89 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.37
|
-2.84 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.21
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 32
|
-2.23 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.22
|
-2.90 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.36
|
-2.79 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.20
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
Participants answered: "Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee (or hip) affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants responded by using a 5-point scale where 1 = very good (no symptom and limitation of normal activities) and 5 = very poor (very severe symptoms and inability to carry out normal activities).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=228 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 2, 4, 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Baseline
|
3.38 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.59
|
3.36 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.57
|
3.32 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.53
|
|
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 2, 4, 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 2
|
-0.70 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.78
|
-0.64 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.85
|
-0.64 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.84
|
|
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 2, 4, 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 4
|
-0.85 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.79
|
-0.86 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.86
|
-0.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.87
|
|
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 2, 4, 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 8
|
-0.72 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.80
|
-0.83 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.83
|
-0.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.92
|
|
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 2, 4, 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 16
|
-0.69 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.83
|
-0.84 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.86
|
-0.80 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.91
|
|
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 2, 4, 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 24
|
-0.71 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.87
|
-0.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.88
|
-0.80 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.88
|
|
Change From Baseline in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 2, 4, 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 32
|
-0.69 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.88
|
-0.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.88
|
-0.80 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.88
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
OMERACT-OARSI response: greater than or equal to (\>=) 50 percent (%) improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of \>=2 units in WOMAC pain or physical function subscale, or at least 2 of the following 3 being true: \>=20% improvement from baseline and absolute change from baseline of \>=1 unit in 1) WOMAC pain subscale, 2) WOMAC physical function subscale, 3) PGA of osteoarthritis (score: 1-5, higher score=more affected). WOMAC pain, physical function subscales assess amount of pain/difficulty experienced (score: 0-10, higher score=higher pain/difficulty).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=223 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
Week 2
|
57.8 percentage of participants
Interval 51.0 to 64.0
|
58.6 percentage of participants
Interval 52.0 to 65.0
|
49.3 percentage of participants
Interval 43.0 to 56.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
Week 4
|
64.9 percentage of participants
Interval 59.0 to 71.0
|
70.5 percentage of participants
Interval 64.0 to 76.0
|
73.5 percentage of participants
Interval 68.0 to 79.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
Week 8
|
61.8 percentage of participants
Interval 55.0 to 68.0
|
68.6 percentage of participants
Interval 63.0 to 75.0
|
70.9 percentage of participants
Interval 65.0 to 77.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
Week 16
|
59.1 percentage of participants
Interval 53.0 to 66.0
|
68.6 percentage of participants
Interval 63.0 to 75.0
|
72.2 percentage of participants
Interval 66.0 to 78.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
Week 24
|
58.7 percentage of participants
Interval 52.0 to 65.0
|
68.2 percentage of participants
Interval 62.0 to 74.0
|
71.7 percentage of participants
Interval 66.0 to 78.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response
Week 32
|
58.2 percentage of participants
Interval 52.0 to 65.0
|
68.2 percentage of participants
Interval 62.0 to 74.0
|
71.7 percentage of participants
Interval 66.0 to 78.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
Percentage of participants with at least 30%, 50%, 70% and 90% reduction from baseline in WOMAC pain subscale score are reported. WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis in index knee or index hip during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from the 5 individual questions scored on a 0 to 10 NRS, where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicated higher pain.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 8: at least 30% reduction
|
50.7 percentage of participants
Interval 44.0 to 57.0
|
62.7 percentage of participants
Interval 56.0 to 69.0
|
66.2 percentage of participants
Interval 60.0 to 72.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 2: at least 30% reduction
|
48.9 percentage of participants
Interval 42.0 to 55.0
|
49.1 percentage of participants
Interval 42.0 to 56.0
|
41.4 percentage of participants
Interval 35.0 to 48.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 2: at least 50% reduction
|
28.4 percentage of participants
Interval 23.0 to 34.0
|
31.4 percentage of participants
Interval 25.0 to 37.0
|
23.9 percentage of participants
Interval 18.0 to 29.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 2: at least 70% reduction
|
13.8 percentage of participants
Interval 9.0 to 18.0
|
16.8 percentage of participants
Interval 12.0 to 22.0
|
14.0 percentage of participants
Interval 9.0 to 19.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 2: at least 90% reduction
|
4.9 percentage of participants
Interval 2.0 to 8.0
|
3.6 percentage of participants
Interval 1.0 to 6.0
|
3.6 percentage of participants
Interval 1.0 to 6.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 4: at least 30% reduction
|
57.3 percentage of participants
Interval 51.0 to 64.0
|
62.7 percentage of participants
Interval 56.0 to 69.0
|
60.4 percentage of participants
Interval 54.0 to 67.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 4: at least 50% reduction
|
39.1 percentage of participants
Interval 33.0 to 45.0
|
40.9 percentage of participants
Interval 34.0 to 47.0
|
41.0 percentage of participants
Interval 35.0 to 47.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 4: at least 70% reduction
|
21.3 percentage of participants
Interval 16.0 to 27.0
|
24.5 percentage of participants
Interval 19.0 to 30.0
|
22.5 percentage of participants
Interval 17.0 to 28.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 4: at least 90% reduction
|
7.6 percentage of participants
Interval 4.0 to 11.0
|
6.8 percentage of participants
Interval 3.0 to 10.0
|
6.3 percentage of participants
Interval 3.0 to 10.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 8: at least 50% reduction
|
35.1 percentage of participants
Interval 29.0 to 41.0
|
46.4 percentage of participants
Interval 40.0 to 53.0
|
46.4 percentage of participants
Interval 40.0 to 53.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 8: at least 70% reduction
|
18.2 percentage of participants
Interval 13.0 to 23.0
|
26.8 percentage of participants
Interval 21.0 to 33.0
|
27.0 percentage of participants
Interval 21.0 to 33.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 8: at least 90% reduction
|
7.6 percentage of participants
Interval 4.0 to 11.0
|
11.4 percentage of participants
Interval 7.0 to 16.0
|
10.8 percentage of participants
Interval 7.0 to 15.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: at least 30% reduction
|
52.4 percentage of participants
Interval 46.0 to 59.0
|
62.3 percentage of participants
Interval 56.0 to 69.0
|
65.3 percentage of participants
Interval 59.0 to 72.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: at least 50% reduction
|
37.3 percentage of participants
Interval 31.0 to 44.0
|
50.0 percentage of participants
Interval 43.0 to 57.0
|
45.5 percentage of participants
Interval 39.0 to 52.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: at least 70% reduction
|
20.4 percentage of participants
Interval 15.0 to 26.0
|
28.6 percentage of participants
Interval 23.0 to 35.0
|
28.4 percentage of participants
Interval 22.0 to 34.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: at least 90% reduction
|
6.2 percentage of participants
Interval 3.0 to 9.0
|
11.8 percentage of participants
Interval 8.0 to 16.0
|
12.2 percentage of participants
Interval 8.0 to 16.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 24: at least 30% reduction
|
50.2 percentage of participants
Interval 44.0 to 57.0
|
62.7 percentage of participants
Interval 56.0 to 69.0
|
65.3 percentage of participants
Interval 59.0 to 72.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 24: at least 50% reduction
|
37.3 percentage of participants
Interval 31.0 to 44.0
|
50.0 percentage of participants
Interval 43.0 to 57.0
|
45.5 percentage of participants
Interval 39.0 to 52.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 24: at least 70% reduction
|
20.4 percentage of participants
Interval 15.0 to 26.0
|
28.2 percentage of participants
Interval 22.0 to 34.0
|
28.8 percentage of participants
Interval 23.0 to 35.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 24: at least 90% reduction
|
7.1 percentage of participants
Interval 4.0 to 10.0
|
11.8 percentage of participants
Interval 8.0 to 16.0
|
11.7 percentage of participants
Interval 7.0 to 16.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 32: at least 30% reduction
|
51.1 percentage of participants
Interval 45.0 to 58.0
|
62.3 percentage of participants
Interval 56.0 to 69.0
|
64.9 percentage of participants
Interval 59.0 to 71.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 32: at least 50% reduction
|
36.9 percentage of participants
Interval 31.0 to 43.0
|
49.5 percentage of participants
Interval 43.0 to 56.0
|
44.1 percentage of participants
Interval 38.0 to 51.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 32: at least 70% reduction
|
20.4 percentage of participants
Interval 15.0 to 26.0
|
27.7 percentage of participants
Interval 22.0 to 34.0
|
27.9 percentage of participants
Interval 22.0 to 34.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With At Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 32: at least 90% reduction
|
6.7 percentage of participants
Interval 3.0 to 10.0
|
11.4 percentage of participants
Interval 7.0 to 16.0
|
11.3 percentage of participants
Interval 7.0 to 15.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis in index knee or index hip during past 48 hours. It is calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher pain. Participants with specified reduction (as percent) from baseline at Week 16 are reported.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=115 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=135 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=118 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: greater than (>) 0%
|
82.6 percentage of participants
|
85.2 percentage of participants
|
89.0 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=10%
|
74.8 percentage of participants
|
81.5 percentage of participants
|
82.2 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=20%
|
65.2 percentage of participants
|
71.9 percentage of participants
|
73.7 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=30%
|
58.3 percentage of participants
|
63.0 percentage of participants
|
67.8 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=40%
|
47.0 percentage of participants
|
57.0 percentage of participants
|
60.2 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=50%
|
43.5 percentage of participants
|
51.9 percentage of participants
|
50.0 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=60%
|
33.0 percentage of participants
|
41.5 percentage of participants
|
41.5 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=70%
|
28.7 percentage of participants
|
32.6 percentage of participants
|
33.9 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=80%
|
18.3 percentage of participants
|
21.5 percentage of participants
|
22.9 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: >=90%
|
9.6 percentage of participants
|
14.8 percentage of participants
|
14.4 percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score
Week 16: 100%
|
4.3 percentage of participants
|
3.7 percentage of participants
|
5.9 percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
Participants answered: "Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee (or hip) affects you, how are you doing today?" Participants responded by using a 5-point scale where 1 = very good and 5 = very poor. Improvement signifies a decrease of at least 2 points on the 5-point scale relative to baseline value.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=228 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Week 2
|
14.5 percentage of participants
Interval 10.0 to 19.0
|
15.8 percentage of participants
Interval 11.0 to 21.0
|
13.3 percentage of participants
Interval 9.0 to 18.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Week 4
|
20.2 percentage of participants
Interval 15.0 to 25.0
|
20.3 percentage of participants
Interval 15.0 to 26.0
|
16.9 percentage of participants
Interval 12.0 to 22.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Week 8
|
15.8 percentage of participants
Interval 11.0 to 21.0
|
18.9 percentage of participants
Interval 14.0 to 24.0
|
24.9 percentage of participants
Interval 19.0 to 31.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Week 16
|
15.4 percentage of participants
Interval 11.0 to 20.0
|
18.0 percentage of participants
Interval 13.0 to 23.0
|
20.9 percentage of participants
Interval 16.0 to 26.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Week 24
|
16.7 percentage of participants
Interval 12.0 to 22.0
|
18.5 percentage of participants
Interval 13.0 to 24.0
|
20.0 percentage of participants
Interval 15.0 to 25.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis
Week 32
|
16.2 percentage of participants
Interval 11.0 to 21.0
|
18.5 percentage of participants
Interval 13.0 to 24.0
|
20.0 percentage of participants
Interval 15.0 to 25.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
WOMAC stiffness subscale is a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to osteoarthritis in index knee or index hip during past 48 hours. It is calculated as mean of the scores from 2 individual questions scored on NRS of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicate higher stiffness. Total score range for WOMAC stiffness subscale score is 0 to 10, where higher scores indicate higher stiffness. Stiffness is defined as a sensation of decreased ease in movement of knee or hip.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=223 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 32
|
-2.36 units on a scale
Interval -2.7 to -2.03
|
-3.21 units on a scale
Interval -3.55 to -2.87
|
-3.05 units on a scale
Interval -3.4 to -2.71
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Baseline
|
6.78 units on a scale
Interval 6.55 to 7.01
|
6.85 units on a scale
Interval 6.61 to 7.08
|
6.73 units on a scale
Interval 6.5 to 6.95
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 2
|
-2.32 units on a scale
Interval -2.63 to -2.02
|
-2.42 units on a scale
Interval -2.75 to -2.1
|
-2.29 units on a scale
Interval -2.61 to -1.98
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 4
|
-2.73 units on a scale
Interval -3.05 to -2.4
|
-3.01 units on a scale
Interval -3.34 to -2.68
|
-2.99 units on a scale
Interval -3.31 to -2.67
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 8
|
-2.43 units on a scale
Interval -2.75 to -2.1
|
-3.17 units on a scale
Interval -3.5 to -2.84
|
-3.05 units on a scale
Interval -3.41 to -2.69
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 16
|
-2.43 units on a scale
Interval -2.76 to -2.1
|
-3.20 units on a scale
Interval -3.54 to -2.87
|
-3.15 units on a scale
Interval -3.5 to -2.8
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 24
|
-2.41 units on a scale
Interval -2.75 to -2.07
|
-3.20 units on a scale
Interval -3.54 to -2.86
|
-3.10 units on a scale
Interval -3.45 to -2.75
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain (5 items), stiffness (2 items) and physical function (17 items) in participants with osteoarthritis of knee or hip. Each item was scored on a 0 to 10 NRS scale, where higher scores indicated higher pain/stiffness or worse function. WOMAC average score was the mean of WOMAC pain, physical function and stiffness subscale scores and ranged from 0 to 10, where higher score indicated worse response.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=223 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Baseline
|
6.54 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.45
|
6.64 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.50
|
6.50 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.41
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 2
|
-2.14 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.99
|
-2.18 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.13
|
-1.94 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.96
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 4
|
-2.56 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.14
|
-2.80 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.18
|
-2.71 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.05
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 8
|
-2.31 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.11
|
-2.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.24
|
-2.85 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.23
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 16
|
-2.30 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.21
|
-2.98 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.29
|
-2.90 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.22
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 24
|
-2.27 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.26
|
-2.97 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.32
|
-2.88 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.21
|
|
Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 32
|
-2.25 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.23
|
-2.98 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.31
|
-2.83 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.20
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
Participants answered: "How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?" Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=220 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Baseline
|
6.15 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.86
|
6.32 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.84
|
6.20 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.86
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 2
|
-1.95 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.17
|
-1.94 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.38
|
-1.67 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.34
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 4
|
-2.26 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.31
|
-2.59 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.34
|
-2.45 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.29
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 8
|
-2.03 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.42
|
-2.65 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.50
|
-2.63 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.32
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 16
|
-2.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.54
|
-2.66 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.48
|
-2.57 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.46
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 24
|
-1.96 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.55
|
-2.65 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.51
|
-2.60 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.42
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 32
|
-1.96 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.51
|
-2.63 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.51
|
-2.56 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.43
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. Missing data was imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF) method. Due to implementation of the FDA clinical hold, all ongoing participants were discontinued from treatment and did not have an opportunity to complete the 56-week treatment period and no efficacy data beyond the Week 32 visit (i.e., Weeks 40, 48 and 56) was collected.
Participants answered: "How much pain have you had when going up or down the stairs?" Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 to 10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = extreme pain.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=224 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=219 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 32
|
-2.46 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.63
|
-3.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.66
|
-2.94 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.54
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Baseline
|
7.52 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.64
|
7.64 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.68
|
7.54 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.72
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 2
|
-2.34 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.28
|
-2.25 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.43
|
-1.99 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.30
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 4
|
-2.86 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.58
|
-3.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.47
|
-2.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.45
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 8
|
-2.60 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.48
|
-3.03 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.59
|
-3.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.53
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 16
|
-2.51 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.63
|
-3.05 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.67
|
-3.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.62
|
|
Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change at Week 24
|
-2.47 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.66
|
-3.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.67
|
-2.98 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.55
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 50Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
Median time to discontinuation due to lack of efficacy was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of Efficacy
|
NA days
Median and full range were not evaluable since no participant discontinued due to lack of efficacy.
|
NA days
Median and full range were not evaluable since no participant discontinued due to lack of efficacy.
|
NA days
Interval 82.0 to 82.0
Median was not evaluable since only 1 participant discontinued due to lack of efficacy.
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 50Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Lack of Efficacy
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64Population: ITT analysis set. 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'Number Analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group. Data were not collected beyond Week 48 due to premature termination of the study in response to FDA clinical hold.
United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved analgesics were permitted as concomitant medications to relieve the pain of osteoarthritis. These medications included opioids, topical analgesics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), capsaicin products and viscosupplementation (example, hyaluronan) and were prescribed at the discretion of the Investigator.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=219 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=221 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 2
|
53.8 percentage of participants
Interval 47.0 to 60.0
|
49.8 percentage of participants
Interval 43.0 to 56.0
|
52.5 percentage of participants
Interval 46.0 to 59.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 4
|
52.9 percentage of participants
Interval 46.0 to 59.0
|
47.7 percentage of participants
Interval 41.0 to 54.0
|
51.6 percentage of participants
Interval 45.0 to 58.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 8
|
53.7 percentage of participants
Interval 47.0 to 60.0
|
47.9 percentage of participants
Interval 41.0 to 55.0
|
51.6 percentage of participants
Interval 45.0 to 58.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 16
|
50.6 percentage of participants
Interval 43.0 to 58.0
|
47.8 percentage of participants
Interval 40.0 to 55.0
|
50.5 percentage of participants
Interval 43.0 to 58.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 24
|
49.5 percentage of participants
Interval 39.0 to 60.0
|
49.0 percentage of participants
Interval 39.0 to 59.0
|
48.9 percentage of participants
Interval 38.0 to 59.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 32
|
33.3 percentage of participants
Interval 12.0 to 55.0
|
47.6 percentage of participants
Interval 26.0 to 69.0
|
52.2 percentage of participants
Interval 32.0 to 73.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 40
|
100 percentage of participants
Interval 100.0 to 100.0
|
0 percentage of participants
Interval 0.0 to 0.0
|
100 percentage of participants
Interval 100.0 to 100.0
|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Used Concomitant Analgesic Medication
Week 48
|
—
|
0 percentage of participants
Interval 0.0 to 0.0
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64Population: ITT analysis set. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure. 'number analyzed' signifies those participants who were evaluable for this measure at given time points for each group. Data were not collected beyond Week 48 due to premature termination of the study in response to FDA clinical hold.
United States FDA-approved analgesics were permitted as concomitant medications to relieve the pain of OA. These medications included opioids, topical analgesics, NSAIDs, capsaicin products and viscosupplementation (example, hyaluronan) and were prescribed at the discretion of the Investigator.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=225 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=219 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=221 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 40
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 7.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 0.0
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 7.0 to 7.0
|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 2
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 4
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 8
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
2.9 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 16
|
2.5 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.4 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 24
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 32
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
7.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 7.0
|
|
Days Per Week of Concomitant Analgesic Medication Usage
Week 48
|
—
|
0.0 days per week
Interval 0.0 to 0.0
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Day 1 up to Week 24Population: ITT analysis set included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of subcutaneous study medication.
Number of participants are reported based on the maximum number of subcutaneous doses of study medication received.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 Participants
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Subcutaneous Doses of Study Medication
1 dose
|
48 Participants
|
36 Participants
|
38 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Subcutaneous Doses of Study Medication
2 doses
|
99 Participants
|
89 Participants
|
103 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Subcutaneous Doses of Study Medication
3 doses
|
64 Participants
|
72 Participants
|
61 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants With Subcutaneous Doses of Study Medication
4 doses
|
19 Participants
|
25 Participants
|
24 Participants
|
Adverse Events
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
Tanezumab 5 mg
Tanezumab 10 mg
Serious adverse events
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 participants at risk
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 participants at risk
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 participants at risk
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Cardiac disorders
Acute myocardial infarction
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Myocardial infarction
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Gastrointestinal haemorrhage
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Gastrooesophageal reflux disease
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Haemorrhoids
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Oesophageal spasm
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Small intestinal obstruction
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Vomiting
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
General disorders
Chest pain
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
General disorders
Non-cardiac chest pain
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Cellulitis
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Lobar pneumonia
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pneumonia
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Foot fracture
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Hip fracture
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Joint dislocation
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Tibia fracture
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Arthralgia
|
1.7%
4/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.3%
3/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Arthritis
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Back pain
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Bunion
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Foot deformity
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Fracture malunion
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Intervertebral disc protrusion
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Neck pain
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Osteoarthritis
|
0.87%
2/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.8%
4/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Osteonecrosis
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.8%
4/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.8%
4/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Breast cancer
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Malignant melanoma
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Headache
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Nephrolithiasis
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Lung disorder
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pneumonia aspiration
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Acute generalised exanthematous pustulosis
|
0.00%
0/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
Other adverse events
| Measure |
Tanezumab 2.5 mg
n=230 participants at risk
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 2.5 milligram (mg) injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 5 mg
n=222 participants at risk
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 5 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
Tanezumab 10 mg
n=226 participants at risk
Tanezumab (RN624 or PF-04383119) 10 mg injection subcutaneously every 8 weeks up to 24 weeks.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diarrhoea
|
0.87%
2/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.4%
3/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Nausea
|
2.6%
6/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.9%
11/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
General disorders
Fatigue
|
1.3%
3/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
3.5%
8/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
General disorders
Injection site reaction
|
8.3%
19/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
9.5%
21/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
8.8%
20/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
General disorders
Oedema peripheral
|
3.9%
9/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
7.2%
16/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
9.7%
22/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Bronchitis
|
2.6%
6/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.1%
9/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
3.1%
7/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Nasopharyngitis
|
1.3%
3/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.3%
5/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Sinusitis
|
2.6%
6/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.1%
9/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Upper respiratory tract infection
|
5.2%
12/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.1%
9/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
5.3%
12/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
4.8%
11/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
5.4%
12/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
8.8%
20/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Contusion
|
1.7%
4/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.2%
5/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Fall
|
3.0%
7/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.3%
5/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
5.3%
12/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Joint injury
|
1.3%
3/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Investigations
Blood alkaline phosphatase increased
|
1.3%
3/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.4%
3/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.2%
5/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Investigations
Blood creatine phosphokinase increased
|
2.6%
6/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
3.6%
8/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.0%
9/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Investigations
Blood lactate dehydrogenase increased
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.3%
5/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.3%
3/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Investigations
Blood triglycerides increased
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.3%
5/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.88%
2/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Vitamin D deficiency
|
0.87%
2/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.90%
2/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.2%
5/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Arthralgia
|
15.2%
35/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
13.5%
30/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
11.5%
26/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Back pain
|
3.0%
7/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
3.6%
8/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
3.5%
8/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Bursitis
|
2.6%
6/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.4%
3/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Joint swelling
|
3.5%
8/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.5%
10/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
5.8%
13/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Muscle spasms
|
2.2%
5/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.4%
10/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Musculoskeletal pain
|
3.5%
8/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
6.8%
15/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
5.3%
12/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Osteoarthritis
|
2.6%
6/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
5.0%
11/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
7.1%
16/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Pain in extremity
|
6.1%
14/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
5.4%
12/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
7.1%
16/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Rotator cuff syndrome
|
1.7%
4/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.00%
0/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.2%
5/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Synovial cyst
|
0.87%
2/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.45%
1/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.0%
9/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Burning sensation
|
0.43%
1/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.3%
5/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.88%
2/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Carpal tunnel syndrome
|
3.5%
8/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.4%
3/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
3.1%
7/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Dizziness
|
1.3%
3/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.3%
5/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
3.5%
8/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Headache
|
3.9%
9/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
4.4%
10/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Hypoaesthesia
|
6.1%
14/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
6.6%
15/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Paraesthesia
|
5.7%
13/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
7.7%
17/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
11.1%
25/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Anxiety
|
2.2%
5/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.90%
2/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Cough
|
2.2%
5/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.4%
3/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.2%
5/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Rash
|
1.7%
4/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.7%
6/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
0.44%
1/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
|
Vascular disorders
Hypertension
|
3.5%
8/230
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
1.8%
4/222
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
2.2%
5/226
Cases of osteonecrosis (ON) reported in this and other A409 studies conducted up to 2010 were adjudicated post-hoc by an expert committee(2010-2012). Few of these events (2 of 87 reported ON cases), were confirmed as ON by the committee. Source: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.39492
|
Additional Information
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee Pfizer has the right to review disclosures, requesting a delay of less than 60 days. Investigator will postpone single center publications until after disclosure of pooled data (all sites), less than 12 months from study completion/termination at all participating sites. Investigator may not disclose previously undisclosed confidential information other than study results.
- Publication restrictions are in place
Restriction type: OTHER