Compare Perceptions and Satisfaction for Two Different Delivery Mechanisms for Etanercept

NCT ID: NCT00482170

Last Updated: 2012-03-30

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

421 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.

Primary objective of this study is to compare patient satisfaction with the prefilled syringe (PFS) and the auto-injector (AI), two different delivery devices for etanercept after 12 weeks of use, using a 10 point scale form totally dissatisfied to totally satisfied.Secondary evaluation focus on the identification of patient and device attributes associated with patient satisfaction.

Detailed Description

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

For the measures of patient's satisfaction with and perceptions of, their device, standard Likert scales are used. This allows the magnitude of individual's perceptions and satisfaction to be measured on a multipoint scale anchored at each end. In addition, the study will describe 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, injection site pain, injection anxiety, injection confidence) will be captured using a questionnaire. 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, demographics, social and educational status psychological status, willingness to self-manage, injection experience) and Psoriasis characteristics (e.g. disease severity, disease duration, co morbidities, prior treatment, quality of life). The study will also take the opportunity to measure health outcome measures as there may be important differences in cost of training and patient support between the two devices.

Conditions

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

Psoriasis

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.

1

Arm 1: Enbrel 50 mg Prefilled Syringe

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Enbrel (etanercept)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Arm 1 = Enbrel 50 mg Prefilled Syringe twice weekly

2

Arm 2 Enbrel 50 mg Autoinjector

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Etanercept

Intervention Type DEVICE

Arm 2 = Enbrel 50 mg Autoinjector twice weekly

Interventions

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

Enbrel (etanercept)

Arm 1 = Enbrel 50 mg Prefilled Syringe twice weekly

Intervention Type DEVICE

Etanercept

Arm 2 = Enbrel 50 mg Autoinjector twice weekly

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Treatment of adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who failed to respond to, or who have a contraindication to, or are intolerant to other systemic therapy including cyclosporine, methotrexate or PUVA
* Eligible for treatment with etanercept according to Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), and applicable local guidelines.
* Aged 18 years or more
* Willing and able to self-inject etanercept.
* Able to store test drug at 2-8oC.
* Negative serum ß-human chorionic gonadotropin (ß-HCG) pregnancy test at baseline (week 0) for all women of childbearing potential. Sexually active women of childbearing potential must use a medically acceptable form of contraception. Medically acceptable forms of contraception include oral contraceptives, injectable or implantable methods, intrauterine devices, or properly used barrier contraception. Sexually active men must agree to use a reliable form of contraception during the study.
* Capable of understanding and willing to provide signed and dated written voluntary informed consent before any protocol-specific procedures are performed.

Exclusion Criteria

* Prior experience of biologics and anti-TNF treatment for their Psoriasis including etanercept.
* Sepsis or risk of sepsis.
* Current or recent infections, including chronic or localized.
* Latex sensitivity.
* Vaccination with live vaccine in last 4 weeks, or expected to require such vaccination during the course of the study.
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.

Bruges, , Belgium

Site Status

Brussels, , Belgium

Site Status

Brussels, , Belgium

Site Status

Edegem, , Belgium

Site Status

Ghent, , Belgium

Site Status

Hasselt, , Belgium

Site Status

Kapellen, , Belgium

Site Status

Liège, , Belgium

Site Status

Hellerup, , Denmark

Site Status

Hørsholm, , Denmark

Site Status

Roskilde, , Denmark

Site Status

Helsinki, , Finland

Site Status

Helsinki, , Finland

Site Status

Joensuu, , Finland

Site Status

Tampere, , Finland

Site Status

Le Mans, Cedex, France

Site Status

Limoges, , France

Site Status

Montpellier, , France

Site Status

Nancy, , France

Site Status

Nantes, , France

Site Status

Paris, , France

Site Status

Pessac, , France

Site Status

Pierre-Bénite, , France

Site Status

Reims, , France

Site Status

Toulouse, , France

Site Status

Augsburg, , Germany

Site Status

Berlin, , Germany

Site Status

Berlin, , Germany

Site Status

Bonn, , Germany

Site Status

Cologne, , Germany

Site Status

Dresden, , Germany

Site Status

Dülmen, , Germany

Site Status

Erlangen, , Germany

Site Status

Freiburg im Breisgau, , Germany

Site Status

Göttingen, , Germany

Site Status

Greifswald, , Germany

Site Status

Hamburg, , Germany

Site Status

Lübeck, , Germany

Site Status

Mainz, , Germany

Site Status

Mannheim, , Germany

Site Status

München, , Germany

Site Status

Münster, , Germany

Site Status

Tübingen, , Germany

Site Status

Wiesbaden, , Germany

Site Status

Würzburg, , Germany

Site Status

Würzburg, , Germany

Site Status

Athens, , Greece

Site Status

Athens, , Greece

Site Status

Ioannina, , Greece

Site Status

Thessaloniki, , Greece

Site Status

Szeged, , Hungary

Site Status

S. Giovanni Rotondo, Foggia, Italy

Site Status

Terracina, Latina, Italy

Site Status

Gallarate, Varese, Italy

Site Status

Capranica, Viterbo, Italy

Site Status

Bologna, , Italy

Site Status

Como, , Italy

Site Status

Milan, , Italy

Site Status

Napoli, , Italy

Site Status

Napoli, , Italy

Site Status

Padua, , Italy

Site Status

Pisa, , Italy

Site Status

Breda, , Netherlands

Site Status

Flushing, , Netherlands

Site Status

Nijmegen, , Netherlands

Site Status

Bergen, , Norway

Site Status

Stavanger, , Norway

Site Status

Tromsø, , Norway

Site Status

Elche, Alicante, Spain

Site Status

Santander, Cantabria, Spain

Site Status

Córdoba, , Spain

Site Status

Granada, , Spain

Site Status

Madrid, , Spain

Site Status

Valencia, , Spain

Site Status

Danderyd, , Sweden

Site Status

Gothenburg, , Sweden

Site Status

Linköping, , Sweden

Site Status

Malmo, , Sweden

Site Status

Countries

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

Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Italy Netherlands Norway Spain Sweden

Other Identifiers

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

0881A6-3326

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id