Trial Outcomes & Findings for Study Conducted in Subjects With Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Moderate to Severe Disease Activity Despite Methotrexate Therapy With or Without Other Non Biologic Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (DMARDs)for at Least 12 Weeks Prior to Screening (NCT NCT01578850)
NCT ID: NCT01578850
Last Updated: 2016-07-06
Results Overview
Proportion of participants who remained in LDA DAS28-ESR \<3.2 at Week 52 is presented below.
COMPLETED
PHASE4
491 participants
Baseline and Week 52
2016-07-06
Participant Flow
The study consisted of Period 1 (an open-label, 24-week treat-to-target period), and Period 2 (a double-blind, randomized, 28-week period for participants who qualified for randomization).
The study was conducted in participants with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had moderate to severe disease activity despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy (≥10 mg/week) with or without other non-biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for at least 12 weeks prior to screening.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Open-Label Treatment
Participants in open-label treatment received Etanercept (ETN) 50 milligram (mg) once a week (QW) with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Etanercept
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Period 1
STARTED
|
489
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 1
COMPLETED
|
452
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 1
NOT COMPLETED
|
37
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 2
STARTED
|
0
|
167
|
176
|
|
Period 2
COMPLETED
|
0
|
154
|
162
|
|
Period 2
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
13
|
14
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Open-Label Treatment
Participants in open-label treatment received Etanercept (ETN) 50 milligram (mg) once a week (QW) with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Etanercept
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Period 1
Insufficient Clinical Response
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 1
Adverse Event
|
11
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 1
Death
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 1
Does Not Meet Entrance Criteria
|
12
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 1
Withdrawal by Subject
|
9
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 1
Study Terminated by Sponsor
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
|
Period 2
Insufficient Clinical Response
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
|
Period 2
Adverse Event
|
0
|
3
|
6
|
|
Period 2
Lost to Follow-up
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
|
Period 2
Withdrawal by Subject
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
|
Period 2
Study Terminated by Sponsor
|
0
|
5
|
4
|
|
Period 2
Unspecified Reasons
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
Baseline Characteristics
Study Conducted in Subjects With Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Moderate to Severe Disease Activity Despite Methotrexate Therapy With or Without Other Non Biologic Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (DMARDs)for at Least 12 Weeks Prior to Screening
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=167 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=176 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Total
n=343 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
46.2 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.88 • n=99 Participants
|
47.0 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.02 • n=107 Participants
|
46.6 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.44 • n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
140 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
150 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
290 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
27 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
26 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
53 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Proportion of participants who remained in LDA DAS28-ESR \<3.2 at Week 52 is presented below.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Remained in Low Disease Activity (LDA) (Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints-erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate [DAS28-ESR] <3.2) at Week 52.
|
43.6 percentage of participants
|
17.3 percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Proportion of participants who remained in Remission (DAS28-ESR \<2.6) at Week 52.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Remained in Remission at Week 52 (DAS28-ESR)
|
53.2 Percentage of participants
|
29.5 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
Proportion of participants who achieved LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP at each visit during period 1 is presented below.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 4 (N= 473)
|
9.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 4 (N= 465)
|
20.6 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 8 (N= 473)
|
20.3 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 8 (N= 471)
|
34.6 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 16 (N= 473)
|
32.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 16 (N= 472)
|
52.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 473)
|
72.1 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-C-reactive Protein [CRP]) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 472)
|
72.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Proportion of participants who achieved LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP at each visit during period 2 is presented below.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
0.6 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.6 Percentage of participants
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
100.0 Percentage of participants
|
100.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
87.7 Percentage of participants
|
85.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
62.6 Percentage of participants
|
41.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
74.4 Percentage of participants
|
55.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
55.2 Percentage of participants
|
24.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
69.1 Percentage of participants
|
41.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
51.5 Percentage of participants
|
20.2 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
69.1 Percentage of participants
|
38.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
43.6 Percentage of participants
|
17.3 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
64.2 Percentage of participants
|
37.1 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
Proportion of participants who achieved remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP at each visit during period 1 is presented below.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 4 (N= 473)
|
4.0 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 4 (N= 465)
|
9.0 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 8 (N= 473)
|
8.9 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 8 (N= 471)
|
17.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 16 (N= 473)
|
13.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 16 (N= 472)
|
31.1 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 473)
|
26.6 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 472)
|
49.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Proportion of participants who achieved LDA (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP at each visit during period 2 is presented below.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
38.0 Percentage of participants
|
36.3 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
64.4 Percentage of participants
|
63.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
32.5 Percentage of participants
|
20.2 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
51.9 Percentage of participants
|
34.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
31.9 Percentage of participants
|
17.3 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
50.0 Percentage of participants
|
25.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
30.7 Percentage of participants
|
11.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
51.9 Percentage of participants
|
21.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
33.7 Percentage of participants
|
13.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP) at Each Visit During Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
46.9 Percentage of participants
|
19.8 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
The DAS assessment is a derived measurement with differential weight given to each component. The DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP was calculated at every visit within the clinical database in period 1. The components of the DAS28 ESR score assessment are: Tender/ Painful Joint Count (28), Swollen Joint Count (28); ESR, Subject General Health VAS assessment. The components of the DAS28 CRP score assessment were: Tender/Painful Joint Count (28); Swollen Joint Count (28), hsCRP, and the Subject General Health VAS assessment. This efficacy measurement was made at every study visit.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 4 (N= 473)
|
-1.61 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.08
|
—
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 4 (N= 465)
|
-1.61 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.05
|
—
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 8 (N= 473)
|
-2.14 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.18
|
—
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 8 (N= 471)
|
-2.09 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.14
|
—
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 16 (N= 473)
|
-2.62 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.26
|
—
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 16 (N= 472)
|
-2.54 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.21
|
—
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 473)
|
-3.23 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.35
|
—
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 1
DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 472)
|
-2.95 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.27
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
The DAS assessment is a derived measurement with differential weight given to each component. The DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP was calculated at every visit within the clinical database in period 2. The components of the DAS28 ESR score assessment are: Tender/ Painful Joint Count (28), Swollen Joint Count (28); ESR, Subject General Health VAS assessment. The components of the DAS28 CRP score assessment were: Tender/Painful Joint Count (28); Swollen Joint Count (28), hsCRP, and the Subject General Health VAS assessment. This efficacy measurement was made at every study visit.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
-3.79 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.04
|
-3.70 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.99
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
-3.36 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.03
|
-3.32 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.05
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
-3.35 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.31
|
-2.73 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.43
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
-3.06 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.26
|
-2.53 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.40
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
-3.20 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.40
|
-2.40 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.49
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
-2.97 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.35
|
-2.27 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.48
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
-3.15 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.36
|
-2.31 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.49
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
-2.95 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.35
|
-2.19 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.50
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-ESR Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
-3.08 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.40
|
-2.28 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.46
|
|
Change From Baseline in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR in Period 2
DAS28-CRP Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
-2.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.36
|
-2.16 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.45
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Flare is defined as the criteria of loss of LDA plus ≥0.6 unit worsening in DAS28-ESR score during period 2.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Had a Recurrence of Disease Symptoms During Period 2, Based on the Protocol Criteria
|
52.1 Percentage of participants
|
79.8 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
EULAR response is based on DAS28-ESR scores. The following good and moderate response is defined based on DAS28-ESR at endpoint (DAS28-ESR improvement at from Baseline in parenthesis): ≤3.2 units (\>1.2 units) is good response; ≤3.2 units (0.6-1.2 units) are moderate response; ≤3.2 units (≤0.6 units) are no response.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 4 (N= 473)
|
9.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 4 (N= 465)
|
18.9 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 8 (N= 473)
|
19.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 8 (N= 471)
|
33.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 16 (N= 473)
|
32.3 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 16 (N= 472)
|
51.9 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 473)
|
71.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 472)
|
71.4 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 4 (N= 473)
|
69.1 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 4 (N= 465)
|
79.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 8 (N= 473)
|
86.9 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 8 (N= 471)
|
87.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 16 (N= 473)
|
92.0 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 16 (N= 472)
|
92.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 473)
|
94.1 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 1.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 472)
|
95.1 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
EULAR response is based on DAS28-ESR scores. The following good and moderate response is defined based on DAS28-ESR at endpoint (DAS28-ESR improvement at from Baseline in parenthesis): ≤3.2 units (\>1.2 units) is good response; ≤3.2 units (0.6-1.2 units) are moderate response; ≤3.2 units (≤0.6 units) are no response.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
99.4 Percentage of participants
|
99.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
86.5 Percentage of participants
|
85.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
62.6 Percentage of participants
|
41.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
73.1 Percentage of participants
|
54.8 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
55.2 Percentage of participants
|
23.8 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
67.9 Percentage of participants
|
40.7 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
50.9 Percentage of participants
|
19.6 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
68.5 Percentage of participants
|
37.7 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-ESR Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
42.9 Percentage of participants
|
16.7 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Good Response: DAS28-CRP Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
63.0 Percentage of participants
|
35.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
100.0 Percentage of participants
|
100.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
100.0 Percentage of participants
|
100.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
95.7 Percentage of participants
|
87.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
96.9 Percentage of participants
|
90.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
93.9 Percentage of participants
|
83.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
94.4 Percentage of participants
|
85.6 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
93.3 Percentage of participants
|
81.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
95.1 Percentage of participants
|
84.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-ESR Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
93.3 Percentage of participants
|
82.1 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving EULAR Good and or Moderate Responses (by Both DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP Scores) at Each Visit During Period 2.
Moderate Response: DAS28-CRP Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
95.7 Percentage of participants
|
84.4 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
SDAI and CDAI are defined as: 1\) SDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0-28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + hs CRP (in mg/dL) in Period 1. 2) CDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0 28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) in Period 1.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: LDA Baseline (N= 478)
|
0.4 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: LDA Week 4 (N= 473)
|
16.7 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: LDA Week 8 (N= 473)
|
33.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: LDA Week 16 (N= 473)
|
53.9 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: LDA Week 24 (N= 473)
|
75.7 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: Remission: Baseline (N= 478)
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: Remission: Week 4 (N= 473)
|
0.4 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: Remission: Week 8 (N= 473)
|
1.7 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: Remission: Week 16 (N= 473)
|
6.1 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI: Remission: Week 24 (N= 473)
|
10.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: LDA: Baseline (N= 478)
|
0.2 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: LDA: Week 4 (N= 465)
|
16.1 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: LDA: Week 8 (N= 471)
|
32.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: LDA: Week 16 (N= 472)
|
52.3 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: LDA: Week 24 (N= 472)
|
72.5 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: Remission: Baseline (N= 478)
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: Remission: Week 4 (N= 465)
|
0.6 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: Remission: Week 8 (N= 471)
|
1.9 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: Remission: Week 16 (N= 472)
|
6.8 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI: Remission: Week 24 (N= 472)
|
14.0 Percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization
SDAI and CDAI are defined as: 1\) SDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0-28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + hs CRP (in mg/dL) in Period 2. 2) CDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0 28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) in Period 2.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: Remission: Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
20.9 Percentage of participants
|
12.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: Remission: Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
22.1 Percentage of participants
|
12.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: Remission: Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
20.9 Percentage of participants
|
11.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: LDA Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.6 Percentage of participants
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: LDA Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
93.9 Percentage of participants
|
90.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: LDA Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
76.1 Percentage of participants
|
57.7 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: LDA Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
71.2 Percentage of participants
|
47.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: LDA Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
70.6 Percentage of participants
|
43.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: LDA Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
66.9 Percentage of participants
|
42.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: Remission: Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: Remission: Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
16.6 Percentage of participants
|
14.3 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
CDAI: Remission: Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
14.7 Percentage of participants
|
14.3 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: LDA: Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.6 Percentage of participants
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: LDA: Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
90.2 Percentage of participants
|
86.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: LDA: Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
73.1 Percentage of participants
|
55.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: LDA: Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
69.8 Percentage of participants
|
42.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: LDA: Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
69.8 Percentage of participants
|
42.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: LDA: Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
69.8 Percentage of participants
|
37.7 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: Remission: Baseline (N= 163, 168)
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
0.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: Remission: Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
20.9 Percentage of participants
|
17.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: Remission: Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
16.3 Percentage of participants
|
16.3 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: Remission: Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
22.8 Percentage of participants
|
12.6 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: Remission: Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
22.2 Percentage of participants
|
13.2 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving LDA or Remission Based on CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2.
SDAI: Remission: Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
25.3 Percentage of participants
|
13.2 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
SDAI and CDAI are defined as: 1\) SDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0-28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + hs CRP (in mg/dL) in Period 1. 2) CDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0 28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) in Period 1.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI Week 4 (N= 473)
|
-16.78 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.72
|
—
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI Week 8 (N= 473)
|
-21.69 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.40
|
—
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI Week 16 (N= 473)
|
-25.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.19
|
—
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
CDAI Week 24 (N= 473)
|
-29.25 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.66
|
—
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI Week 4 (N= 465)
|
-18.19 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.44
|
—
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI Week 8 (N= 471)
|
-23.06 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.89
|
—
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI Week 16 (N= 472)
|
-27.17 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.61
|
—
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 1.
SDAI Week 24 (N= 472)
|
-30.56 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.27
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
SDAI and CDAI are defined as: 1\) SDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0-28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + hs CRP (in mg/dL) in Period 2. 2) CDAI = DAS28 prorated Swollen Joint Count (0-28) + DAS28 prorated Tender Joint Count (0 28) + Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) + Subject Global Assessment of arthritis (0-10) in Period 2.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
CDAI: Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
-32.11 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.06
|
-32.23 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.49
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
CDAI: Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
-29.62 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.10
|
-26.49 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 15.87
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
CDAI: Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
-28.71 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.56
|
-24.33 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.45
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
CDAI: Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
-28.63 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.58
|
-23.81 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.48
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
CDAI: Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
-28.30 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.61
|
-23.52 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 15.98
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
SDAI: Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
-33.61 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.07
|
-33.68 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.03
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
SDAI: Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
-31.07 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.58
|
-27.58 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.50
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
SDAI: Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
-30.20 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.05
|
-25.44 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.17
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
SDAI: Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
-30.21 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.14
|
-24.85 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.29
|
|
Change of CDAI and SDAI at Each Visit During Period 2
SDAI: Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
-29.86 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.03
|
-24.57 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.79
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
A 66 swollen and 68 tender joint count was used for calculating ACR responses. The ACR's definition for calculating improvement in RA (ACR20) was calculated as a 20% improvement in tender and swollen joint counts and 20% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR core set measures: subject and physician global assessments of arthritis, pain, disability, and an acute phase reactant. Similarly, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 were calculated with the respective percent improvement. This efficacy measurement was made at every study visit.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 4 (N= 469)
|
58.6 percentage of participants
1.08
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 8 (N= 469)
|
73.1 percentage of participants
1.05
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 16 (N= 469)
|
83.6 percentage of participants
1.18
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 24 (N= 469)
|
87.8 percentage of participants
1.14
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 4 (N= 469)
|
19.8 percentage of participants
1.26
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 8 (N= 469)
|
35.8 percentage of participants
1.21
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 16 (N= 469)
|
55.2 percentage of participants
1.35
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 24 (N= 469)
|
72.5 percentage of participants
1.27
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 4 (N= 469)
|
4.3 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 8 (N= 469)
|
11.1 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 16 (N= 469)
|
23.7 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 24 (N= 469)
|
39.4 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 4 (N= 469)
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 8 (N= 469)
|
0.4 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 16 (N= 469)
|
1.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 1 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 24 (N= 469)
|
5.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
A 66 swollen and 68 tender joint count was used for calculating ACR responses. The ACR's definition for calculating improvement in RA (ACR20) was calculated as a 20% improvement in tender and swollen joint counts and 20% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR core set measures: subject and physician global assessments of arthritis, pain, disability, and an acute phase reactant. Similarly, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 were calculated with the respective percent improvement. This efficacy measurement was made at every study visit.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 24 (N= 161, 168)
|
96.3 Percentage of participants
|
96.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 28 (N= 161, 168)
|
91.3 Percentage of participants
|
81.5 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 36 (N= 161, 168)
|
88.2 Percentage of participants
|
76.8 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 44 (N= 161, 168)
|
86.3 Percentage of participants
|
76.2 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 20: Week 52 (N= 161, 168)
|
87.0 Percentage of participants
|
76.2 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 24 (N= 161, 168)
|
88.2 Percentage of participants
|
85.7 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 28 (N= 161, 168)
|
75.2 Percentage of participants
|
63.7 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 36 (N= 161, 168)
|
68.9 Percentage of participants
|
51.8 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 44 (N= 161, 168)
|
69.6 Percentage of participants
|
50.6 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 50: Week 52 (N= 161, 168)
|
68.3 Percentage of participants
|
50.6 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 24 (N= 161, 168)
|
49.7 Percentage of participants
|
52.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 28 (N= 161, 168)
|
41.0 Percentage of participants
|
33.9 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 36 (N= 161, 168)
|
44.7 Percentage of participants
|
27.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 44 (N= 161, 168)
|
43.5 Percentage of participants
|
25.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 70: Week 52 (N= 161, 168)
|
41.0 Percentage of participants
|
25.0 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 24 (N= 161, 168)
|
8.1 Percentage of participants
|
8.3 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 28 (N= 161, 168)
|
8.7 Percentage of participants
|
5.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 36 (N= 161, 168)
|
11.8 Percentage of participants
|
5.4 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 44 (N= 161, 168)
|
9.3 Percentage of participants
|
4.8 Percentage of participants
|
|
Percentage of Participants Achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 and ACR90 (by 66/68 Joint Counts) During Period 2 at Each Visit.
ACR 90: Week 52 (N= 161, 168)
|
13.0 Percentage of participants
|
7.1 Percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
A total of 66 swollen and 68 tender joints were assessed for tenderness/pain and swelling by the same qualified personnel (when possible) at each visit. For ACR responses, a 66/68 joint count was used. For DAS28-ESR, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) calculations, the 28 joint count was used, which included: shoulders, elbows, wrists, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints, and knees.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 4
|
-6.49 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.07
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 8
|
-8.59 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.32
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 16
|
-10.12 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.82
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 24
|
-11.50 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.79
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 4
|
-5.52 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.02
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 8
|
-7.04 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.36
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 16
|
-8.21 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.44
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 24
|
-9.01 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.65
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 4
|
-9.71 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.00
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 8
|
-13.02 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.95
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 16
|
-15.21 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.90
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 24
|
-17.41 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.72
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 4
|
-7.12 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.86
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 8
|
-9.03 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.54
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 16
|
-10.49 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.62
|
—
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 1 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 24
|
-11.53 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.65
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
A total of 66 swollen and 68 tender joints were assessed for tenderness/pain and swelling by the same qualified personnel (when possible) at each visit. For ACR responses, a 66/68 joint count was used. For DAS28-ESR, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) calculations, the 28 joint count was used, which included: shoulders, elbows, wrists, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints, and knees.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 24
|
-12.65 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.25
|
-12.35 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.45
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 28
|
-11.69 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.74
|
-10.08 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.84
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 36
|
-11.22 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.91
|
-9.23 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.07
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 44
|
-11.19 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.82
|
-8.97 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.01
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Tender Joint Count: Week 52
|
-11.03 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.81
|
-8.78 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.83
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 24
|
-9.78 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.16
|
-9.98 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.58
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 28
|
-8.97 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.27
|
-8.70 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.94
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 36
|
-8.64 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.51
|
-8.16 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.04
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 44
|
-8.71 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.52
|
-8.03 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.08
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
28 Swollen Joint Count: Week 52
|
-8.59 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.42
|
-7.98 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.05
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 24
|
-18.31 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.13
|
-18.19 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.03
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 28
|
-17.02 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.48
|
-15.20 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.95
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 36
|
-17.27 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.55
|
-17.13 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.28
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 44
|
-18.67 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.90
|
-18.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.71
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Tender Joint Count: Week 52
|
-17.88 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.21
|
-17.61 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.57
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 24
|
-12.09 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.76
|
-12.40 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.45
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 28
|
-11.23 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.77
|
-10.81 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.66
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 36
|
-11.26 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.05
|
-10.67 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.59
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 44
|
-12.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.03
|
-11.63 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.58
|
|
Change in the Tender and Swollen Joint Counts at Each Visit During Period 2 (Using 28 Joint Count as Well as 66/68 Joint Counts).
68 Swollen Joint Count: Week 52
|
-11.98 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.17
|
-11.89 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.91
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
The investigator estimated the subject's overall disease activity over the last 2 to 3 days (independent of the Subject Global Assessment of arthritis) using a scale between 0 (no disease activity) and 10 (extreme disease activity) and marking one number with an 'X'.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 4 (N= 473)
|
-2.60 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.78
|
—
|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 8 (N= 473)
|
-3.46 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.90
|
—
|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 16 (N= 473)
|
-4.12 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.96
|
—
|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 24 (N= 473)
|
-4.79 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.02
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
The investigator estimated the subject's overall disease activity over the last 2 to 3 days (independent of the Subject Global Assessment of arthritis) using a scale between 0 (no disease activity) and 10 (extreme disease activity) and marking one number with an 'X'.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 24
|
-5.28 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.56
|
-5.26 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.78
|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 28
|
-4.93 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.78
|
-4.23 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.43
|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 36
|
-4.83 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.86
|
-3.89 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.48
|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 44
|
-4.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.02
|
-3.79 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.53
|
|
Change in the Physician Global Assessment of Arthritis at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 52
|
-4.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.03
|
-3.74 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.43
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
Subjects assessed their overall disease activity over the last 2 to 3 days using a scale between 0 (no disease activity) and 10 (extreme disease activity), which corresponded to the magnitude of their pain) and marked one number with an 'X'.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 1
Week 4 (N= 473)
|
-2.18 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.21
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 1
Week 8 (N= 473)
|
-2.60 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.34
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 1
Week 16 (N= 473)
|
-3.32 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.44
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 1
Week 24 (N= 473)
|
-3.97 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.60
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Subjects assessed their overall disease activity over the last 2 to 3 days using a scale between 0 (no disease activity) and 10 (extreme disease activity), which corresponded to the magnitude of their pain) and marked one number with an 'X'.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 2
Week 24
|
-4.39 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.43
|
-4.64 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.16
|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 2
Week 28
|
-4.03 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.70
|
-3.48 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.94
|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 2
Week 36
|
-4.02 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.71
|
-3.05 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.94
|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 2
Week 44
|
-3.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.79
|
-3.02 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.91
|
|
Change in the Subject Global Assessment of Arthritis in Period 2
Week 52
|
-3.91 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.84
|
-3.02 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.91
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
Morning stiffness was defined as stiffness in and around the joints, lasting at least 1 hour before maximal improvement. Participants assessed their overall disease activity over the last 2 to 3 days using a scale between 0 (no disease activity) and 10 (extreme disease activity), which corresponded to the magnitude of their pain) and marked one number with an 'X'.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 4 (N= 467)
|
-78.56 minutes
Standard Deviation 143.68
|
—
|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 8 (N= 467)
|
-90.58 minutes
Standard Deviation 147.42
|
—
|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 16 (N= 467)
|
-102.25 minutes
Standard Deviation 158.76
|
—
|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 1
Week 24 (N= 467)
|
-109.32 minutes
Standard Deviation 183.15
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Morning stiffness was defined as stiffness in and around the joints, lasting at least 1 hour before maximal improvement. Participants assessed their overall disease activity over the last 2 to 3 days using a scale between 0 (no disease activity) and 10 (extreme disease activity), which corresponded to the magnitude of their pain) and marked one number with an 'X'.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 24 (N= 163, 166)
|
-118.30 minutes
Standard Deviation 171.15
|
-121.93 minutes
Standard Deviation 186.17
|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 28 (N= 163, 166)
|
-134.42 minutes
Standard Deviation 224.70
|
-109.57 minutes
Standard Deviation 163.79
|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 36 (N= 163, 166)
|
-132.05 minutes
Standard Deviation 224.86
|
-104.40 minutes
Standard Deviation 164.13
|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 44 (N= 163, 166)
|
-129.86 minutes
Standard Deviation 223.78
|
-103.14 minutes
Standard Deviation 162.65
|
|
Change in Morning Stiffness (Measured in Minutes) at Each Visit During Period 2
Week 52 (N= 163, 166)
|
-129.49 minutes
Standard Deviation 223.68
|
-100.31 minutes
Standard Deviation 153.62
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
Participants were asked to answer the question "In general how would you rate your health over the last 2 3 weeks?" by marking a vertical line at the appropriate position through the 100 mm VAS. The length on the line was measured from the left (in mm). For Pain VAS, participants assessed the severity of their arthritis pain during the last 2 to 3 days using a 100 mm VAS by marking a vertical line at the appropriate position on the scale between 0 (no pain) and 100 (most severe pain), which corresponded to the magnitude of their pain.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
General Health VAS: Week 4 (N= 473)
|
-20.20 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.22
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
General Health VAS: Week 8 (N= 473)
|
-25.17 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.59
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
General Health VAS: Week 16 (N= 473)
|
-32.54 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.89
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
General Health VAS: Week 24 (N= 473)
|
-40.67 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.28
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
Pain VAS: Week 4 (N= 473)
|
-24.07 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.56
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
Pain VAS: Week 8 (N= 473)
|
-28.55 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.08
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
Pain VAS: Week 16 (N= 473)
|
-35.20 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.81
|
—
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 1
Pain VAS: Week 24 (N= 473)
|
-42.49 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.05
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
Participants were asked to answer the question "In general how would you rate your health over the last 2-3 weeks?" by marking a vertical line at the appropriate position through the 100 mm VAS. The length on the line was measured from the left (in mm). For Pain VAS, participants assessed the severity of their arthritis pain during the last 2 to 3 days using a 100 mm VAS by marking a vertical line at the appropriate position on the scale between 0 (no pain) and 100 (most severe pain), which corresponded to the magnitude of their pain.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
General Health VAS: Week 24
|
-46.66 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.72
|
-47.53 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.21
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
General Health VAS: Week 28
|
-41.31 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.01
|
-34.95 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.95
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
General Health VAS: Week 36
|
-39.84 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.56
|
-30.74 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.79
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
General Health VAS: Week 44
|
-39.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.61
|
-30.10 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.88
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
General Health VAS: Week 52
|
-39.81 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.16
|
-29.67 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.21
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
Pain VAS: Week 24
|
-46.61 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.33
|
-49.69 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.64
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
Pain VAS: Week 28
|
-43.30 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.34
|
-38.17 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.24
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
Pain VAS: Week 36
|
-41.42 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.01
|
-34.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.30
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
Pain VAS: Week 44
|
-41.21 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.01
|
-33.07 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.46
|
|
Change in the Subject General Health VAS and Pain VAS at Each Visit During Period 2
Pain VAS: Week 52
|
-40.95 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.61
|
-32.91 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.26
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24Population: The FAS for Period 1 (Open Label FAS) included all randomized participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1 (ie, ETN or MTX).
The DAS assessment is a derived measurement with differential weight given to each component. The DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP was calculated at every visit within the clinical database in period 1. The components of the DAS28 ESR score assessment are: Tender/ Painful Joint Count (28), Swollen Joint Count (28); ESR, Subject General Health VAS assessment. The components of the DAS28 CRP score assessment were: Tender/Painful Joint Count (28); Swollen Joint Count (28), hsCRP, and the Subject General Health VAS assessment. This efficacy measurement was made at every study visit.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=478 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
CRP: Week 4 (N= 465)
|
-14.07 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.30
|
—
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
CRP: Week 8 (N= 471)
|
-14.43 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.51
|
—
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
CRP: Week 16 (N= 472)
|
-14.71 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.32
|
—
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
CRP: Week 24 (N= 472)
|
-14.51 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.64
|
—
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
ESR: Week 4 (N= 473)
|
-17.32 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.44
|
—
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
ESR: Week 8 (N= 473)
|
-19.28 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.62
|
—
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
ESR: Week 16 (N= 473)
|
-21.10 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.20
|
—
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 1
ESR: Week 24 (N= 473)
|
-26.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.19
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 28, 36, 44 and 52Population: The FAS included all randomized participants who met the period 2 DAS28-ESR inclusion criteria, had at least one dose of study drug during Period 2 (ie, ETN, MTX or PBO) and had at least one valid efficacy (DAS28-ESR) evaluation after randomization.
The DAS assessment is a derived measurement with differential weight given to each component. The DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP was calculated at every visit within the clinical database in period 1. The components of the DAS28 ESR score assessment are: Tender/ Painful Joint Count (28), Swollen Joint Count (28); ESR, Subject General Health VAS assessment. The components of the DAS28 CRP score assessment were: Tender/Painful Joint Count (28); Swollen Joint Count (28), hsCRP, and the Subject General Health VAS assessment. This efficacy measurement was made at every study visit.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Etanercept
n=163 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=168 Participants
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
CRP: Week 24 (N= 161, 168)
|
-16.92 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.64
|
-14.47 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.59
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
CRP: Week 28 (N= 160, 166)
|
-15.94 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.52
|
-8.59 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.46
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
CRP: Week 36 (N= 162, 167)
|
-15.56 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 31.36
|
-7.45 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.55
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
CRP: Week 44 (N= 162, 167)
|
-16.47 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.09
|
-6.72 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.32
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
CRP: Week 52 (N= 162, 167)
|
-16.29 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.74
|
-7.07 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.76
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
ESR: Week 24 (N= 163, 168)
|
-31.52 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.55
|
-31.02 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.24
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
ESR: Week 28 (N= 163, 168)
|
-26.96 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.04
|
-20.28 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.68
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
ESR: Week 36 (N= 163, 168)
|
-26.10 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.17
|
-16.94 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.08
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
ESR: Week 44 (N= 163, 168)
|
-24.39 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.99
|
-16.14 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.10
|
|
Change in CRP and ESR at Each Visit During Period 2
ESR: Week 52 (N= 163, 168)
|
-23.56 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.88
|
-16.27 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.65
|
Adverse Events
Open-Label Treatment
Etanercept
Placebo
Serious adverse events
| Measure |
Open-Label Treatment
n=489 participants at risk
Participants in open-label treatment received ETN 50 mg with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Etanercept
n=167 participants at risk
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=176 participants at risk
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Cardiac disorders
Coronary artery disease
|
0.00%
0/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.57%
1/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Acute myocardial infarction
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal pain
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
General disorders
Sudden death
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Drug-induced liver injury
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pneumonia
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.57%
1/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Sinusitis
|
0.00%
0/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.57%
1/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
0.00%
0/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.57%
1/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Extradural abscess
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Gastroenteritis
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Herpes zoster
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Intervertebral discitis
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Lower respiratory tract infection
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pyelonephritis acute
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Salmonella sepsis
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Femoral neck fracture
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Road traffic accident
|
0.00%
0/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.57%
1/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Ulna fracture
|
0.00%
0/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.57%
1/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Osteoarthritis
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Rheumatoid arthritis
|
0.20%
1/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Myopathy
|
0.00%
0/489 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.00%
0/167 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
0.57%
1/176 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
Other adverse events
| Measure |
Open-Label Treatment
n=489 participants at risk
Participants in open-label treatment received ETN 50 mg with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Etanercept
n=167 participants at risk
Participants were randomized to receive ETN 50 mg QW with MTX (with or without other DMARDs).
|
Placebo
n=176 participants at risk
Participants were randomized to receive PBO 50 mg QW + MTX (with or without DMARDs).
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Infections and infestations
Upper respiratory tract infection
|
5.3%
26/489 • Number of events 28 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
2.4%
4/167 • Number of events 4 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
5.1%
9/176 • Number of events 9 • Adverse events were reported from the signing of the informed consent to 28 days after the last dose of study medication through the last participant's visit.
The Open Label Safety Population is defined as all participants who had at least one dose of open label study drug during Period 1. The Double Blind Safety Population is defined as all randomized participants who had at least one dose of study drug during period 2.
|
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