Trial Outcomes & Findings for MK0431A Comparative Study in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes (0431A-079)(COMPLETED) (NCT NCT00482729)
NCT ID: NCT00482729
Last Updated: 2017-06-09
Results Overview
A1C is measured as percent. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 18 A1C percent minus the Week 0 A1C percent.
COMPLETED
PHASE3
1246 participants
Baseline and Week 18
2017-06-09
Participant Flow
First Patient In: 26-Jun-2007; Last Patient Last Visit for end of study: 28-Apr-2009; Two-hundred four medical clinics in the United States (US) and 5 in Puerto Rico.
Patients 18-78 years of age with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with inadequate glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c \[A1C\] \>7.5% at screening visit) who were appropriate for treatment with oral antihyperglycemic therapy and had not been on an anti-hyperglycemic agent (AHA) in the last 4 months were eligible to participate.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
626
|
624
|
|
Overall Study
Completed Phase A
|
484
|
482
|
|
Overall Study
Completed Phase B
|
409
|
406
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
409
|
406
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
217
|
218
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
Adverse Event
|
29
|
33
|
|
Overall Study
Creatinine/Creatinine Clearance Criteria
|
0
|
2
|
|
Overall Study
Hyperglycemia Criteria
|
7
|
5
|
|
Overall Study
Lack of Efficacy
|
4
|
16
|
|
Overall Study
Lost to Follow-up
|
86
|
66
|
|
Overall Study
Physician Decision
|
10
|
7
|
|
Overall Study
Pregnancy
|
4
|
2
|
|
Overall Study
Protocol Violation
|
10
|
18
|
|
Overall Study
Withdrawal by Subject
|
67
|
69
|
Baseline Characteristics
MK0431A Comparative Study in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes (0431A-079)(COMPLETED)
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=625 Participants
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=621 Participants
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Total
n=1246 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
49.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.5 • n=5 Participants
|
50.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.5 • n=7 Participants
|
49.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.5 • n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
272 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
266 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
538 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
353 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
355 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
708 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
|
17 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
24 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
41 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black
|
82 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
88 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
170 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
|
508 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
489 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
997 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
|
18 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
20 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
38 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Hemoglobin A1c (A1C)
|
9.91 Percent
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.83 • n=5 Participants
|
9.83 Percent
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.77 • n=7 Participants
|
9.87 Percent
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.80 • n=5 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 18Population: The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all patients who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study therapy, had a baseline value and ≥ 1 post-baseline value for this outcome. Data after initiation of additional AHA were treated as missing. For FAS with no data at Week 18, the last post-baseline observed measurement was carried forward to Week 18.
A1C is measured as percent. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 18 A1C percent minus the Week 0 A1C percent.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=559 Participants
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=564 Participants
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (A1C) at Week 18
|
-2.37 Percent
Interval -2.49 to -2.24
|
-1.76 Percent
Interval -1.88 to -1.64
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Week 18Population: The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all patients who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study therapy, had a baseline value and ≥1 post-baseline value for this outcome. Data after initiation of additional AHA were treated as missing. For FAS with no data at Week 18, the last post-baseline observed measurement was carried forward to Week 18.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=559 Participants
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=564 Participants
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Patients With A1C < 7.0% at Week 18
Patients with A1C <7.0% at Week 18
|
275 Participants
|
193 Participants
|
|
Number of Patients With A1C < 7.0% at Week 18
Patients with A1C ≥7.0% at Week 18
|
284 Participants
|
371 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 18Population: The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all patients who received at least 1dose of double-blind study therapy, had a baseline value and ≥1 post-baseline value for this outcome. Data after initiation of additional AHA were treated as missing. For FAS with no data at Week 18, the last post-baseline observed measurement was carried forward to Week 18.
FPG is measured as mg/dL. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 18 FPG mg/dL minus the Week 0 FPG mg/dL.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=560 Participants
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=566 Participants
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) at Week 18
|
-69.4 mg/dL
Interval -74.1 to -64.6
|
-53.7 mg/dL
Interval -58.4 to -48.9
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline and Week 44Population: The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all patients who received at least 1 dose of double-blind study therapy, had a baseline value and ≥1 post-baseline value for this outcome. Data after initiation of additional AHA were included. For FAS with no data at Week 44, the last post-baseline observed measurement was carried forward to Week 44.
A1C is measured as percent. Thus, this change from baseline reflects the Week 44 A1C percent minus the Week 0 A1C percent.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=560 Participants
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=569 Participants
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in A1C at Week 44
|
-2.25 Percent
Interval -2.38 to -2.12
|
-1.77 Percent
Interval -1.89 to -1.64
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Week 44Population: The Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all patients who received at least 1dose of double-blind study therapy, had a baseline value and ≥1 post-baseline value for this outcome. Data after initiation of additional AHA were included. For FAS with no data at Week 44, the last post-baseline observed measurement was carried forward to Week 44.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=560 Participants
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=569 Participants
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Patients With A1C < 7.0% at Week 44
Patients with A1C <7.0% at Week 44
|
258 Participants
|
173 Participants
|
|
Number of Patients With A1C < 7.0% at Week 44
Patients with A1C ≥7.0% at Week 44
|
302 Participants
|
396 Participants
|
Adverse Events
Sita/Met FDC
Metformin
Serious adverse events
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=625 participants at risk
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=621 participants at risk
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Cardiac disorders
Any Cardiac Disorders
|
0.80%
5/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.97%
6/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Acute coronary syndrome
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Acute myocardial infarction
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Atrial flutter
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Cardiac failure congestive
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Cardio-respiratory arrest
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Coronary artery disease
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.48%
3/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Myocardial infarction
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Myocardial ischaemia
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Any Gastrointestinal Disorders
|
0.32%
2/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Food poisoning
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Pancreatitis
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Pancreatitis acute
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Pancreatitis chronic
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
General disorders
Any General Disorders and Administration site Conditions
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.48%
3/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
General disorders
Adverse drug reaction
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
General disorders
Electrocution
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
General disorders
Non-cardiac chest pain
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Any Hepatobiliary disorders
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Cholecystitis
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Cholelithiasis
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Any Infections and Infestations
|
0.96%
6/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.97%
6/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Appendicitis
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Bronchitis
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Cellulitis
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Enterocolitis infectious
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Gastroenteritis
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Gastroenteritis viral
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Hepatitis C
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pneumonia streptococcal
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pyelonephritis acute
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Any Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications
|
0.32%
2/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Contusion
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Pneumothorax traumatic
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Rib fracture
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Skull fractured base
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Any Metabolism and Nutrition Disorders
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Diabetes mellitus
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Diabetic foot
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Any Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
|
0.48%
3/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.81%
5/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Colon cancer
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Endometrial cancer metastatic
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Laryngeal cancer
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Lung adenocarcinoma metastatic
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Malignant melanoma
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Metastatic renal cell carcinoma
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Ovarian adenoma
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Prostate cancer metastatic
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Any Nervous System Disorders
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.81%
5/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Carotid artery disease
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Cerebrovascular accident
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Transient ischaemic attack
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions
Any Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions
Abortion spontaneous
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Any Psychiatric Disorders
|
0.32%
2/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.48%
3/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Anxiety
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Panic attack
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Schizophrenia
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Suicidal ideation
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Any Renal and Urinary Disorders
|
0.32%
2/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.32%
2/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Nephrolithiasis
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Neurogenic bladder
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Postrenal failure
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Renal colic
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Renal failure acute
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Any Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders
|
0.48%
3/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pneumonia aspiration
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pneumothorax
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pulmonary embolism
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Respiratory distress
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Any Vascular Disorders
|
0.32%
2/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.64%
4/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Aneurysm
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Aortic aneurysm
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Aortic stenosis
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Peripheral arterial occlusive disease
|
0.16%
1/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.00%
0/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Thrombophlebitis
|
0.00%
0/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
0.16%
1/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
Other adverse events
| Measure |
Sita/Met FDC
n=625 participants at risk
The Sitagliptin/Metformin Fixed Dose Combination (Sita/Met FDC) group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of Sita/Met initiated at a dose of 50/500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 50/1000 mg b.i.d.; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
Metformin
n=621 participants at risk
The Metformin group includes data from patients randomized to receive treatment with oral tablets of metformin initiated at a dose of 500 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) The dose was to have been up-titrated over 4 weeks to 1000 mg b.i.d. ; however, patients could stay in the study on a minimum dose of Sita/Met 50/500 mg b.i.d. if a higher dose was not tolerated.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Any Gastrointestinal Disorders
|
17.1%
107/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
21.9%
136/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diarrhoea
|
13.8%
86/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
18.0%
112/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Nausea
|
5.9%
37/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
7.1%
44/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Any Infections and infestations
|
9.9%
62/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
9.2%
57/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Nasopharyngitis
|
5.3%
33/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
4.2%
26/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Upper respiratory tract infection
|
4.8%
30/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
5.0%
31/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Any Nervous system disorders
|
5.6%
35/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
3.7%
23/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Headache
|
5.6%
35/625 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
3.7%
23/621 • Week 0 through Week 44
1 patient in the Sita/Met FDC group and 3 patients in the Metformin group from Site 079011301, which was identified as non-compliant with some of the requirements of Good Clinical Practice. For this reason, data from all four randomized patients at this site were deemed unreliable and were excluded from the primary efficacy and safety analysis.
|
Additional Information
Senior Vice President, Global Clinical Development
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee Merck agreements may vary with individual investigators, but will not prohibit any investigator from publishing. Merck supports the publication of results from all centers of a multi-center trial but requests that reports based on single-site data not precede the primary publication of the entire clinical trial.
- Publication restrictions are in place
Restriction type: OTHER