Efficacy and Safety Study of Abatacept to Treat Lupus Nephritis

NCT ID: NCT00430677

Last Updated: 2015-03-20

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

TERMINATED

Clinical Phase

PHASE2/PHASE3

Total Enrollment

423 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2007-06-30

Study Completion Date

2011-08-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this clinical research study is to learn if addition of abatacept is safe and improves the effectiveness of treatment of patients with active lupus nephritis who are also taking mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and corticosteroids.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Double Blind Period: Treatment, Parallel Assignment, Double Blind (Subject, Investigator), Randomized, Active Control, Safety/Efficacy Study

Open Label Period: Prevention, Single Group Assignment, Open Label, Uncontrolled, Safety/Efficacy Study

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Abatacept 30 mg/kg+Corticosteroids+MMF

Short-term Period

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Corticosteroids (prednisone or prednisolone)

Intervention Type DRUG

tablets, oral, 0.5-0.8 mg/kg, daily

Abatacept

Intervention Type DRUG

intravenous solution, injectable, 30 mg/kg, every 28 days

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)

Intervention Type DRUG

tablets, oral, 1.5 to 2 g, daily

Abatacept 10 mg/kg+Corticosteroids+MMF

Short-term Period

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Corticosteroids (prednisone or prednisolone)

Intervention Type DRUG

tablets, oral, 0.5-0.8 mg/kg, daily

Abatacept

Intervention Type DRUG

intravenous solution, injectable, 10 mg/kg, every 28 days

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)

Intervention Type DRUG

tablets, oral, 1.5 to 2 g, daily

Placebo+Corticosteroids+MMF

Short-term Period

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Corticosteroids (prednisone or prednisolone)

Intervention Type DRUG

tablets, oral, 0.5-0.8 mg/kg, daily

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)

Intervention Type DRUG

tablets, oral, 1.5 to 2 g, daily

Abatacept 10mg/kg

Long-term Extension Period

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Abatacept

Intervention Type DRUG

intravenous solution, injectable, 10 mg/kg, every 28 days

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Corticosteroids (prednisone or prednisolone)

tablets, oral, 0.5-0.8 mg/kg, daily

Intervention Type DRUG

Abatacept

intravenous solution, injectable, 30 mg/kg, every 28 days

Intervention Type DRUG

Abatacept

intravenous solution, injectable, 10 mg/kg, every 28 days

Intervention Type DRUG

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)

tablets, oral, 1.5 to 2 g, daily

Intervention Type DRUG

Abatacept

intravenous solution, injectable, 10 mg/kg, every 28 days

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Orencia BMS-188667 Orencia BMS-188667

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) as defined by meeting at least 4 of the 11 classification criteria of the American College of Rheumatology for the classification of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, either sequentially or coincident. The 4 criteria need not be present at study entry
* Renal biopsy within 12 months prior to screening visit indicating active proliferative lupus glomerulonephritis (met ISN/RPS Class III or IV classification criteria \[2003\], excluding Class III \[C\], IV-S \[C\] and IV-G \[C\], or the World Health Organization Class III or IV classification criteria \[1982\], excluding Class IIIc, IVd). If the renal biopsy was performed \>3 months but ≤12 months prior to screening visit, at least 1 of the following 3 serologies (performed locally) must have been abnormal prior to screening visit: complement (C3 or C4) level below normal range OR anti-dsDNA \>upper limit of normal range.
* A stable serum creatinine ≤3 mg/dL

Exclusion Criteria

* Subjects with a rise in serum creatinine of ≥1 mg/dL within 1 month prior to the screening visit
* Subjects with drug-induced SLE, as opposed to idiopathic SLE
* Subjects with severe, unstable and/or progressive Central nervous system (CNS) lupus
* Subjects with autoimmune disease other than SLE as their main diagnosis (e.g.; Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Multiple Sclerosis \[MS\])
* Subjects who have received treatment with cyclophosphamide within 3 months of randomization (Day 1).
* Subjects who have received treatment with rituximab \< 6 months prior to the screening visit
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Bristol-Myers Squibb

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Bristol-Myers Squibb

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Bristol-Myers Squibb

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University Of Alabama At Birmingham

Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Arizona Arthritis Center

Tucson, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Wallace Rheumatic Study Center

Los Angeles, California, United States

Site Status

University Of Kansas Medical Center

Kansas City, Kansas, United States

Site Status

Boston University School Of Medicine

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Hennepin County Medical Center

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Suny Downstate Medical Center

Brooklyn, New York, United States

Site Status

Northshore Lij Health System

Lake Success, New York, United States

Site Status

The Feinstein Institute For Medical Research

Manhasset, New York, United States

Site Status

Suny Upstate Medical University

Syracuse, New York, United States

Site Status

University Of North Carolina At Chapel Hill

Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Ok Medical Research Foundation

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States

Site Status

Rheumatology Consultants Pllc

Knoxville, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Virginia Mason Medical Center

Seattle, Washington, United States

Site Status

Local Institution

Capital Federal, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Site Status

Local Institution

Ciudad Autonoma de Buenos Aire, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Site Status

Local Institution

Córdoba, Córdoba Province, Argentina

Site Status

Local Institution

San Miguel de Tucumán, Tucumán Province, Argentina

Site Status

Local Institution

Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia

Site Status

Local Institution

Clayton, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Local Institution

Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Local Institution

Parkville, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Local Institution

Brussels, , Belgium

Site Status

Local Institution

Leuven, , Belgium

Site Status

Local Institution

Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil

Site Status

Local Institution

Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

Site Status

Local Institution

Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Site Status

Local Institution

Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Site Status

Local Institution

São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

Site Status

Local Institution

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Site Status

Local Institution

Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Site Status

Local Institution

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Local Institution

Québec, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Local Institution

Beijing, Beijing Municipality, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Beijing, Beijing Municipality, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Beijing, Beijing Municipality, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Beijing, Beijing Municipality, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Xi’an, Shanxi, China

Site Status

Local Institution

Créteil, , France

Site Status

Local Institution

Paris, , France

Site Status

Local Institution

Strasbourg, , France

Site Status

Local Institution

Toulouse, , France

Site Status

Local Institution

Hong Kong, , Hong Kong

Site Status

Local Institution

Gujarat, Ahmedabad, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Nadiād, Gujarat, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Bangalore, Karnataka, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Bangalore, Karnataka, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Kochi, Kerala, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Mumbai, Maharajhsra, India

Site Status

Local Institution

Hyderabad, , India

Site Status

Local Institution

Visakhapatnam, , India

Site Status

Local Institution

Aguascalientes, Aguascalientes, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

San Luis Potosí City, San Luis Potosí, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

Metepec, State of Mexico, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico

Site Status

Local Institution

Bydgoszcz, , Poland

Site Status

Local Institution

Gdansk, , Poland

Site Status

Local Institution

Wroclaw, , Poland

Site Status

Local Institution

Moscow, , Russia

Site Status

Local Institution

Yaroslaval, , Russia

Site Status

Local Institution

Yekaterinburg, , Russia

Site Status

Local Institution

Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa

Site Status

Local Institution

Observatory, Western Cape, South Africa

Site Status

Local Institution

Panorama, Western Cape, South Africa

Site Status

Local Institution

Seoul, Sungdong-Gu, South Korea

Site Status

Local Institution

Seoul, , South Korea

Site Status

Local Institution

Seoul, , South Korea

Site Status

Local Institution

Kaohsiung City, , Taiwan

Site Status

Local Institution

Taichung, , Taiwan

Site Status

Local Institution

Taichung, , Taiwan

Site Status

Local Institution

Taipei, , Taiwan

Site Status

Local Institution

Taoyuan District, , Taiwan

Site Status

Local Institution

Gaziantep, , Turkey (Türkiye)

Site Status

Local Institution

Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom

Site Status

Local Institution

London, Greater London, United Kingdom

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States Argentina Australia Belgium Brazil Canada China France Hong Kong India Mexico Poland Russia South Africa South Korea Taiwan Turkey (Türkiye) United Kingdom

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Wolf BJ, Spainhour JC, Arthur JM, Janech MG, Petri M, Oates JC. Development of Biomarker Models to Predict Outcomes in Lupus Nephritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016 Aug;68(8):1955-63. doi: 10.1002/art.39623.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 26867033 (View on PubMed)

Furie R, Nicholls K, Cheng TT, Houssiau F, Burgos-Vargas R, Chen SL, Hillson JL, Meadows-Shropshire S, Kinaszczuk M, Merrill JT. Efficacy and safety of abatacept in lupus nephritis: a twelve-month, randomized, double-blind study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014 Feb;66(2):379-89. doi: 10.1002/art.38260.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 24504810 (View on PubMed)

Wofsy D, Hillson JL, Diamond B. Comparison of alternative primary outcome measures for use in lupus nephritis clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum. 2013 Jun;65(6):1586-91. doi: 10.1002/art.37940.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 23529285 (View on PubMed)

Wofsy D, Hillson JL, Diamond B. Abatacept for lupus nephritis: alternative definitions of complete response support conflicting conclusions. Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Nov;64(11):3660-5. doi: 10.1002/art.34624.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 22806274 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

IM101-075

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Daratumumab to Treat Active Lupus Nephritis
NCT04868838 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING PHASE2