Study Comparing Perceptions and Satisfaction for Two Different Delivery Mechanisms for Etanercept

NCT ID: NCT00459706

Last Updated: 2013-03-28

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

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE3

Total Enrollment

640 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2007-09-30

Study Completion Date

2009-09-30

Brief Summary

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

The purpose of this study is to explore and compare the perceptions and satisfaction for two different delivery mechanisms for Etanercept (Etanercept Autoinjector and the Etanercept Prefilled Syringe) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Detailed Description

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

This study describes patient perceptions related to device attributes, which are of importance in describing overall patient perception. A range of potential device benefits (e.g. ease of use, convenience, confidence, presence or absence of fear, side effects related to administration) is captured using a questionnaire based on the outputs of patient interviews.

The study aims to characterize patient attributes that will indicate when one device may result in greater patient satisfaction than another. Patient attributes are composed of patient characteristics (e.g. age, sex, self efficacy, expectations of treatment, perception of their illness) and RA characteristics (e.g. disease severity, disease duration, prior treatment, functional impairment).

Conditions

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

Rheumatoid Arthritis

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

NONE

Study Groups

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

Enbrel 50 mg Prefilled Syringe

Enbrel 50 mg subcutaneously once weekly for 12 Weeks using Prefilled Syringe

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Enbrel 50 mg Prefilled Syringe

Intervention Type DEVICE

Enbrel 50 mg subcutaneously once weekly for 12 Weeks using Prefilled Syringe

Enbrel 50 mg Autoinjector

Enbrel 50 mg subcutaneously once weekly for 12 Weeks using Autoinjector

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Enbrel 50 mg Autoinjector

Intervention Type DEVICE

Enbrel 50 mg subcutaneously once weekly for 12 Weeks using Autoinjector

Interventions

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

Enbrel 50 mg Prefilled Syringe

Enbrel 50 mg subcutaneously once weekly for 12 Weeks using Prefilled Syringe

Intervention Type DEVICE

Enbrel 50 mg Autoinjector

Enbrel 50 mg subcutaneously once weekly for 12 Weeks using Autoinjector

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Diagnosis of RA according to the ACR-Criteria.
* Eligible for treatment with etanercept according to Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), and applicable local guidelines.
* Willing and able to self-inject etanercept.

Exclusion:

* Prior experience of biologics and anti-TNF treatment for their RA including etanercept.
* Sepsis or risk of sepsis.
* Current or recent infections, including chronic or localized.
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.

Pfizer

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.

Medical Monitor

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer

Locations

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

Frederiksberg, , Denmark

Site Status

Hjørring, , Denmark

Site Status

Holbæk, , Denmark

Site Status

Silkeborg, , Denmark

Site Status

Helsinki, , Finland

Site Status

Hyvinkää, , Finland

Site Status

Joensuu, , Finland

Site Status

Lohja, , Finland

Site Status

Amiens, , France

Site Status

Aulnay-sous-Bois, , France

Site Status

Avignon, , France

Site Status

Boulogne-Billancourt, , France

Site Status

Brest, , France

Site Status

Cahors, , France

Site Status

Corbeilles-Essonnes, , France

Site Status

Grenoble, , France

Site Status

Lille, , France

Site Status

Lyon, , France

Site Status

Marseille, , France

Site Status

Montpellier, , France

Site Status

Montpellier, , France

Site Status

Niort, , France

Site Status

Orléans, , France

Site Status

Paris, , France

Site Status

Paris, , France

Site Status

Pierre-Bénite, , France

Site Status

Reims, , France

Site Status

Rouen, , France

Site Status

Toulouse, , France

Site Status

Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, , France

Site Status

Erlangen, Bay, Germany

Site Status

Frankfurt am Main, Hesse, Germany

Site Status

Pirna, Saxony, Germany

Site Status

Bad Abbach, , Germany

Site Status

Bad Nauheim, , Germany

Site Status

Berlin, , Germany

Site Status

Berlin, , Germany

Site Status

Cologne, , Germany

Site Status

Düsseldorf, , Germany

Site Status

Erlangen, , Germany

Site Status

Essen, , Germany

Site Status

Göttingen, , Germany

Site Status

Hanover, , Germany

Site Status

Hanover, , Germany

Site Status

Hofheim/Taunus, , Germany

Site Status

Leipzig, , Germany

Site Status

München, , Germany

Site Status

Nienburg, , Germany

Site Status

Oberammergau, , Germany

Site Status

Osnabrück, , Germany

Site Status

Tübingen, , Germany

Site Status

Villingen-Schwenningen, , Germany

Site Status

Würzburg, , Germany

Site Status

Zeven, , Germany

Site Status

Ariano Irpino, Avellino, Italy

Site Status

S. Pietro Vernotico, Brescia, Italy

Site Status

San Cesario di Lecce, Lecce, Italy

Site Status

Alessandria, , Italy

Site Status

Bologna, , Italy

Site Status

Cagliari, , Italy

Site Status

Cinisello Balsamo, , Italy

Site Status

Como, , Italy

Site Status

Coppito, , Italy

Site Status

Fano, , Italy

Site Status

Ferrara, , Italy

Site Status

Foggia, , Italy

Site Status

Massa, , Italy

Site Status

Milan, , Italy

Site Status

Napoli, , Italy

Site Status

Napoli, , Italy

Site Status

Padua, , Italy

Site Status

Palermo, , Italy

Site Status

Parma, , Italy

Site Status

Reggio Calabria, , Italy

Site Status

Rieti, , Italy

Site Status

Roma, , Italy

Site Status

Roma, , Italy

Site Status

S. Dona Di Piave, , Italy

Site Status

Terni, , Italy

Site Status

Torino, , Italy

Site Status

Torrette Di Ancona, , Italy

Site Status

Verona, , Italy

Site Status

Vimercate, , Italy

Site Status

Arnhem, , Netherlands

Site Status

Eindhoven, , Netherlands

Site Status

Rotterdam, , Netherlands

Site Status

Gjettum, , Norway

Site Status

Harstad, , Norway

Site Status

Kristiansand, , Norway

Site Status

Lillehammer, , Norway

Site Status

Skien, , Norway

Site Status

Trondheim, , Norway

Site Status

Tønsberg, , Norway

Site Status

Danderyd, , Sweden

Site Status

Malmo, , Sweden

Site Status

Stockholm, , Sweden

Site Status

Sundsvall, , Sweden

Site Status

Uppsala, , Sweden

Site Status

Vasterås, , Sweden

Site Status

Västerås, , Sweden

Site Status

Ashford, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Basingstoke, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Cambridge, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Chertsey, , United Kingdom

Site Status

London, , United Kingdom

Site Status

London, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Manchester, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Portsmouth, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Southampton, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Stoke-on-Trent, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Truro, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Westcliff-on-Sea, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Wigan, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Countries

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

Denmark Finland France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Sweden United Kingdom

Other Identifiers

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

B1801017

Identifier Type: OTHER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

0881K1-6000

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

NCT00595452

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: nct_alias

More Related Trials

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

Enbrel Liquid Immunogenicity Protocol
NCT00249041 COMPLETED PHASE3