Skip to content

Study Evaluating the Cost of the Treatments of the Refractory Psoriatic Arthritis to the Conventional Therapy

An Observational Study to Evaluate the Cost of the Treatments of the Refractory Psoriatic Arthritis to the Conventional Therapy

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00303186
Enrollment
107
Registered
2006-03-15
Start date
2005-02-28
Completion date
2011-06-30
Last updated
2012-07-30

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Arthritis, Psoriatic, Psoriasis

Keywords

Rheumatoid Arthritis

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to conduct an economic analysis on the cost of conventional therapy as compared to biologic therapy and the direct/indirect costs of disease management in patients with refractory psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Primary outcomes are to qualify the economic burden of refractory PsA care. The secondary outcomes are to assess efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of different therapies.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Pfizer
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Eighteen years of age or older * Inflammatory arthropathy associated with psoriasis meet the ACR criteria for PsA * Patients with diagnosis of active and progressive PsA who have failure with conventional treatments

Exclusion criteria

* Significant concurrent medical diseases including cancer or a history of cancer, uncontrolled congestive heart failure, myocardial infarctions within 12 months or other clinically significant cardiovascular diseases, immunodeficiency syndromes or concomitant infectious diseases.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12Month 12Overall cost per participant per month was evaluated as part of health economics evaluation to quantify burden of Refractory PsA and its treatment, resources absorbed by the disease and its care into monetary terms. Overall cost was defined as sum of direct and indirect costs (productivity losses). Direct costs included cost of following cost variables: pharmacological treatment; hospitalizations; diagnostic examinations, laboratory analysis and specialist visits; transports.
Mean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60Month 60Overall cost per participant per month was evaluated as part of health economics evaluation to quantify burden of Refractory PsA and its treatment, resources absorbed by the disease and its care into monetary terms. Overall cost was defined as sum of direct and indirect costs (productivity losses). Direct costs included cost of following cost variables: pharmacological treatment; hospitalizations; diagnostic examinations, laboratory analysis and specialist visits; transports.
Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER)Baseline up to Month 60ICER: ratio of the incremental cost of treatment over the incremental effectiveness. Incremental cost = difference in cost between baseline and month 60. Effectiveness was defined as quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, i.e. difference in Euro Quality of Life 5 Dimension (EQ-5D)- health state profile utility score between baseline and month 60. (EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a sum of the scores of the 10 questions. Total possible score range: 0-100, where higher score referred to higher impairment in the functional ability.
Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0=none and 10=very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.
Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Radiology Index (BASRI)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60BASRI- Radiographs of participants with AS were scored using the New York criteria for the sacroiliac joints on a scale of 2 to 4, the lumbar and cervical spine on a scale of 0 to 4 (0 = normal, 1 = suspicious, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, 4 = severe). These 3 scores were added together to produce the BASRI-spine (BASRI-s) score (range 2 to 12). Similarly, hip joints were scored on a scale of 0 to 4 to give BASRI-hip (BASRI-h). Sum of BASRI-s and BASRI-h produced BASRI-total (BASRI-t) score; total range 2 to 16, higher score represented worse health state.
Modified Schober's TestBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Measurement in centimeters (cm) of the distance between marks originally placed while the participant was standing erect 10 cm above and 5 cm below the midpoint of a line that joints the posterior superior iliac spines. Distance between marks was re-measured with participant maximally bend forward, knees fully extended, with spine in full flexion.
Chest Expansion MeasurementBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Chest expansion, measured in cm, is defined as the difference in thoracic circumference during full expiration versus full inspiration, measured at the fourth intercostal space (nipple line).
Occiput-to-wall DistanceBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Occiput-to-wall distance: distance between the occiput (posterior or back portion of the head) and the wall when the participant stood with heels and shoulder against the wall and the back straight.
Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Assessment of enthesitis was performed in the following 7 domains: 1) 1st costochondral joint left and right, 2) 7th costochondral joint left and right, 3) posterior superior iliac spine left and right, 4) anterior superior iliac spine left and right, 5) iliac crest left and right, 6) 5th lumbar spinous process and 7) proximal insertion of Achilles tendon left and right. Each domain was graded for the presence (1) and absence (0) of tenderness yielding total MASES ranging from 0 (no tenderness) to 13 (worst possible score; severe tenderness).
Number of Swollen and Tender JointsBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Number of swollen joints was determined by examination of 66 joints and identifying when swelling was present. The number of swollen joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no swelling = 0, swelling =1. Number of tender joints was determined by examining 68 joints and identified the joints that were painful under pressure or to passive motion. The number of tender joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no tenderness = 0, tenderness = 1.
Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) ResponseMonth 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60ACR20 response: greater than or equal to (\>=) 20 percent (%) improvement in tender joint count; \>= 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and \>= 20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire \[HAQ\]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP).
Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) ResponseMonth 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60ACR50 response: \>= 50% improvement in tender joint count; \>= 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and \>= 50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and CRP.
Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) ResponseMonth 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60ACR70 response: \>= 70% improvement in tender joint count; \>= 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and \>= 70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and CRP.
Number of Participants With Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) 20 ResponseMonth 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants. ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 20 = 20% improvement from baseline and an absolute change \>= 10 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity; 100=high disease activity) for \>= 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.
Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Disease Activity ScoreBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Measured using a 100 millimeter (mm) VAS ranging from 0 mm = very good to 100 mm = very bad.
Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease ActivityBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, with 0 mm = no disease activity.
Visual Analogue Scale for Pain (VAS-pain)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60100 mm line (VAS) marked by participant. Intensity of pain range (over past week): 0 = no pain to 100 = worst possible pain.
Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60ESR is a laboratory test that provides a non-specific measure of inflammation. The test assesses the rate at which red blood cells fall in a test tube. Normal range is 0-30 millimeter/hour (mm/hr). A higher rate is consistent with inflammation.
C-reactive Protein (CRP)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.
Duration of Morning StiffnessBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Duration of morning stiffness is defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and was able to resume normal activities without stiffness in minutes (if none was present = 0; if morning stiffness was continuing, average of duration of stiffness over the past 3 days was reported; if stiffness persisted the entire day, 1440 minutes \[24 hours\*60 minutes\] was recorded).
Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60HAQ: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks: 1) dress/groom; 2) arise; 3) eat; 4) walk; 5) reach; 6) grip; 7) hygiene; and 8) common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point Likert scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty.
Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Health State Profile Utility ScoreBaseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. It assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.
Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Visual Analog Scale (VAS)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.
36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning) and was reported as 2 summary scores; Physical Component Score and Mental Component Score. Total score range for the summary scores = 0-100 where higher scores represented higher level of functioning.
Radiographic Score Based on WassenbergBaseline, Month 12, Month 24, Month 60Radiographic score based on wassenberg consisted of 2 sub-scores, proliferation score (PS) assessing bone proliferation and destruction score (DS) assessing joint surface destruction. Score range for PS and DS was 0 to 160 (where higher score represented higher bone proliferation) and 0 to 200 (where higher score represented higher destruction), respectively. Total score = sum of PS and DS (range 0 to 360); higher score represented worse state.
Number of Participants Achieving Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC)Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60PsARC is comprised of 4 clinical improvement criteria: 1 unit (0-5 Likert scale) improvement on the Physician Global Assessment (PGA); 20% (0-100 scale) improvement on the participant assessments; and 30% reduction in the number of tender joints; and 30% reduction in the number of swollen joints. To achieve a clinical response, the participant must improve in 2 of the 4 PsARC criteria, 1 of which has to be the number of tender or swollen joints and none of the 4 scores could worsen.
Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score. Body was divided into 4 sections: head, arms, trunk, legs. For each section, percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0= 0% to 6= 90-100%. Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema, induration, desquamation; scale: 0= none to 4= maximum. Final PASI = sum of severity parameters for each section\*area score\*weight of section (head: 0.1, arms: 0.2, body: 0.3, legs: 0.4); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease.

Countries

Italy

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
All Participants
Participants with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) prescribed with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab) for the treatment of refractory PsA to the conventional treatments according to the Italian recommendations of Italian Society of Rheumatology were observed for 60 months.
107
Total107

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyOther52

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicAll Participants
Age Continuous49.68 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.7
Mean Cost per Participant per Month
Diagnostic, laboratory, specialist visits
14.12 Euro/participant-month
STANDARD_DEVIATION 22.7
Mean Cost per Participant per Month
Hospitalizations
27.92 Euro/participant-month
STANDARD_DEVIATION 104.56
Mean Cost per Participant per Month
Indirect costs
96.05 Euro/participant-month
STANDARD_DEVIATION 260.85
Mean Cost per Participant per Month
Overall
253.20 Euro/participant-month
STANDARD_DEVIATION 324.19
Mean Cost per Participant per Month
Pharmacological treatment
105.14 Euro/participant-month
STANDARD_DEVIATION 160.53
Mean Cost per Participant per Month
Transports
9.96 Euro/participant-month
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.03
Sex: Female, Male
Female
56 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
51 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
8 / 107
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 107

Outcome results

Primary

Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER)

ICER: ratio of the incremental cost of treatment over the incremental effectiveness. Incremental cost = difference in cost between baseline and month 60. Effectiveness was defined as quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, i.e. difference in Euro Quality of Life 5 Dimension (EQ-5D)- health state profile utility score between baseline and month 60. (EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. Total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.)

Time frame: Baseline up to Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
All ParticipantsIncremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER)39678.6 ratio
Primary

Mean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12

Overall cost per participant per month was evaluated as part of health economics evaluation to quantify burden of Refractory PsA and its treatment, resources absorbed by the disease and its care into monetary terms. Overall cost was defined as sum of direct and indirect costs (productivity losses). Direct costs included cost of following cost variables: pharmacological treatment; hospitalizations; diagnostic examinations, laboratory analysis and specialist visits; transports.

Time frame: Month 12

Population: Intent-to-Treat (ITT) population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12Overall1026.32 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 443.86
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12Pharmacological treatment970.14 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 445.87
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12Hospitalizations4.14 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 35.46
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12Diagnostic, laboratory, specialist visits13.60 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 8.96
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12Transports11.32 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 24.19
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 12Indirect costs27.11 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 52.35
Primary

Mean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60

Overall cost per participant per month was evaluated as part of health economics evaluation to quantify burden of Refractory PsA and its treatment, resources absorbed by the disease and its care into monetary terms. Overall cost was defined as sum of direct and indirect costs (productivity losses). Direct costs included cost of following cost variables: pharmacological treatment; hospitalizations; diagnostic examinations, laboratory analysis and specialist visits; transports.

Time frame: Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) is signifying those participants who were evaluable for this measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60Hospitalizations16.97 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 36.36
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60Diagnostic, laboratory, specialist visits8.55 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 8.63
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60Transports2.58 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 4.87
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60Indirect costs11.55 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 37.06
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60Overall986.34 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 469.17
All ParticipantsMean Cost Per Participant Per Month at Month 60Pharmacological treatments946.70 Euro/participant-monthStandard Deviation 462.71
Secondary

36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)

SF-36 is a standardized survey evaluating 8 aspects of functional health and well being: physical and social functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, bodily pain, general health, vitality, mental health. The score for a section is an average of the individual question scores, which are scaled 0-100 (100=highest level of functioning) and was reported as 2 summary scores; Physical Component Score and Mental Component Score. Total score range for the summary scores = 0-100 where higher scores represented higher level of functioning.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All Participants36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Month 12: Mental Component Score (n=103)39.15 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.08
All Participants36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Month 60: Physical Component Score (n=55)40.77 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.54
All Participants36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Baseline: Physical Component Score (n=94)31.88 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.22
All Participants36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Baseline: Mental Component Score (n=94)40.80 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.5
All Participants36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Month 12: Physical Component Score (n=103)40.44 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.06
All Participants36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Month 60: Mental Component Score (n=55)45.03 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.42
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: physical component score and Month 12: physical component score.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-10.34, -4.47]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: physical component score and Month 60: physical component score.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-8.56, -3.32]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12: physical component score and Month 60: physical component score.p-value: 0.30895% CI: [-1.19, 3.68]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: mental component score and Month 12: mental component score.p-value: 0.58995% CI: [-3.14, 1.8]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: mental component score and Month 60: mental component score.p-value: 0.00395% CI: [-9.12, -2.06]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12: mental component score and Month 60: mental component score.p-value: 0.00295% CI: [-9.23, -2.18]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)

BASDAI is a validated self assessment tool used to determine disease activity in participant with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS). Utilizing a VAS of 0-10 (0=none and 10=very severe) participant's answered 6 questions measuring discomfort, pain and fatigue. The final BASDAI score averages the individual assessments for a final score range of 0-10.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsBath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)Baseline (n=107)5.95 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.82
All ParticipantsBath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)Month 12 (n=107)3.23 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.32
All ParticipantsBath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)Month 60 (n=55)3.34 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.46
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.26, 3.18]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.59, 2.87]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.30995% CI: [-0.83, 0.27]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI)

BASFI is a validated self assessment tool that determines the degree of functional limitation in AS. Utilizing a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of 0-10 (0 = easy, 10 = impossible), participants answered 10 questions assessing their ability in completing normal daily activities or physically demanding activities. The BASFI score is a sum of the scores of the 10 questions. Total possible score range: 0-100, where higher score referred to higher impairment in the functional ability.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsBath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI)Baseline (n=107)43.37 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.49
All ParticipantsBath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI)Month 12 (n=107)25.65 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.53
All ParticipantsBath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI)Month 60 (n=53)22.46 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.78
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [12.38, 23.07]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [6.99, 18.21]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.83395% CI: [-5.7, 4.61]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Radiology Index (BASRI)

BASRI- Radiographs of participants with AS were scored using the New York criteria for the sacroiliac joints on a scale of 2 to 4, the lumbar and cervical spine on a scale of 0 to 4 (0 = normal, 1 = suspicious, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, 4 = severe). These 3 scores were added together to produce the BASRI-spine (BASRI-s) score (range 2 to 12). Similarly, hip joints were scored on a scale of 0 to 4 to give BASRI-hip (BASRI-h). Sum of BASRI-s and BASRI-h produced BASRI-total (BASRI-t) score; total range 2 to 16, higher score represented worse health state.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: Data was not statistically analyzed because of insufficient data collected and small sample size achieved.

Secondary

Chest Expansion Measurement

Chest expansion, measured in cm, is defined as the difference in thoracic circumference during full expiration versus full inspiration, measured at the fourth intercostal space (nipple line).

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsChest Expansion MeasurementBaseline (n=52)4.38 cmStandard Deviation 5.52
All ParticipantsChest Expansion MeasurementMonth 12 (n=0)NA cm
All ParticipantsChest Expansion MeasurementMonth 60 (n=52)10.85 cmStandard Deviation 16.72
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: 0.01595% CI: [-12.155, -1.355]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

C-reactive Protein (CRP)

The test for CRP is a laboratory measurement for evaluation of an acute phase reactant of inflammation through the use of an ultrasensitive assay. A decrease in the level of CRP indicates reduction in inflammation and therefore improvement.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsC-reactive Protein (CRP)Baseline (n=104)59.41 milligram/deciliter (mg/dL)Standard Deviation 148.83
All ParticipantsC-reactive Protein (CRP)Month 12 (n=103)42.07 milligram/deciliter (mg/dL)Standard Deviation 129.7
All ParticipantsC-reactive Protein (CRP)Month 60 (n=46)2.30 milligram/deciliter (mg/dL)Standard Deviation 3.6
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000595% CI: [-13.52, 46.04]Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [22.33, 83.29]Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.03495% CI: [-10.84, 77.64]Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Duration of Morning Stiffness

Duration of morning stiffness is defined as the time elapsed when participant woke up in the morning and was able to resume normal activities without stiffness in minutes (if none was present = 0; if morning stiffness was continuing, average of duration of stiffness over the past 3 days was reported; if stiffness persisted the entire day, 1440 minutes \[24 hours\*60 minutes\] was recorded).

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: Data was not statistically analyzed because of insufficient data collected and small sample size achieved.

Secondary

Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)

ESR is a laboratory test that provides a non-specific measure of inflammation. The test assesses the rate at which red blood cells fall in a test tube. Normal range is 0-30 millimeter/hour (mm/hr). A higher rate is consistent with inflammation.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Baseline (n=105)42.07 mm/hrStandard Deviation 121.18
All ParticipantsErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Month 12 (n=104)16.36 mm/hrStandard Deviation 16.79
All ParticipantsErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Month 60 (n=49)16.61 mm/hrStandard Deviation 14.77
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.01, 50.4]Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [7.81, 18.57]Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.13295% CI: [-6.4, 1.77]Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Health State Profile Utility Score

EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single utility score. It assesses level of current health for 5 domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain and discomfort, and anxiety and depression; 1 indicates better health state (no problems); 3 indicates worst health state (confined to bed). Scoring formula developed by EuroQol Group assigns a utility value for each domain in the profile. Score is transformed and results in a total score range -0.594 to 1.000; higher score indicates a better health state.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsEuro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Health State Profile Utility ScoreBaseline (n=105)0.38 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.32
All ParticipantsEuro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Health State Profile Utility ScoreMonth 12 (n=107)0.63 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.27
All ParticipantsEuro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Health State Profile Utility ScoreMonth 60 (n=55)0.63 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.28
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [0.18, 0.3]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-0.31, -0.12]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.78995% CI: [-0.08, 0.06]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Visual Analog Scale (VAS)

EQ-5D: participant rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in terms of a single index value. The VAS component rates current health state on a scale from 0 mm (worst imaginable health state) to 100 mm (best imaginable health state); higher scores indicate a better health state.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsEuro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Visual Analog Scale (VAS)Baseline (n=105)46.91 mmStandard Deviation 20.98
All ParticipantsEuro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Visual Analog Scale (VAS)Month 12 (n=107)66.76 mmStandard Deviation 20.37
All ParticipantsEuro Quality of Life (EQ-5D)- Visual Analog Scale (VAS)Month 60 (n=54)64.17 mmStandard Deviation 21.08
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [14.59, 24.22]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: 0.000195% CI: [-18.77, -6.59]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.11595% CI: [-1.21, 10.92]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)

HAQ: participant-reported assessment of ability to perform tasks: 1) dress/groom; 2) arise; 3) eat; 4) walk; 5) reach; 6) grip; 7) hygiene; and 8) common activities over past week. Each item scored on 4-point Likert scale from 0 to 3: 0=no difficulty; 1=some difficulty; 2=much difficulty; 3=unable to do. Overall score was computed as the sum of domain scores and divided by the number of domains answered. Total possible score range 0-3 where 0 = least difficulty and 3 = extreme difficulty.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsHealth Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)Month 12 (n=93)0.71 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.56
All ParticipantsHealth Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)Baseline (n=107)1.14 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.57
All ParticipantsHealth Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)Month 60 (n=55)0.65 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.61
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [0.35, 0.62]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [0.26, 0.56]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.695% CI: [-0.24, 0.14]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES)

Assessment of enthesitis was performed in the following 7 domains: 1) 1st costochondral joint left and right, 2) 7th costochondral joint left and right, 3) posterior superior iliac spine left and right, 4) anterior superior iliac spine left and right, 5) iliac crest left and right, 6) 5th lumbar spinous process and 7) proximal insertion of Achilles tendon left and right. Each domain was graded for the presence (1) and absence (0) of tenderness yielding total MASES ranging from 0 (no tenderness) to 13 (worst possible score; severe tenderness).

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsMaastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES)Baseline (n=107)3.65 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.76
All ParticipantsMaastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES)Month 12 (n=107)2.17 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.52
All ParticipantsMaastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES)Month 60 (n=54)1.43 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.53
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [0.918, 2.05]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [1.01, 2.99]t-test, 1 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.22395% CI: [-0.35, 1.46]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Modified Schober's Test

Measurement in centimeters (cm) of the distance between marks originally placed while the participant was standing erect 10 cm above and 5 cm below the midpoint of a line that joints the posterior superior iliac spines. Distance between marks was re-measured with participant maximally bend forward, knees fully extended, with spine in full flexion.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsModified Schober's TestMonth 12 (n=0)NA cm
All ParticipantsModified Schober's TestMonth 60 (n=53)5.91 cmStandard Deviation 5.91
All ParticipantsModified Schober's TestBaseline (n=52)10.65 cmStandard Deviation 12.45
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: 0.00495% CI: [1.619, 8.301]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Number of Participants Achieving Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC)

PsARC is comprised of 4 clinical improvement criteria: 1 unit (0-5 Likert scale) improvement on the Physician Global Assessment (PGA); 20% (0-100 scale) improvement on the participant assessments; and 30% reduction in the number of tender joints; and 30% reduction in the number of swollen joints. To achieve a clinical response, the participant must improve in 2 of the 4 PsARC criteria, 1 of which has to be the number of tender or swollen joints and none of the 4 scores could worsen.

Time frame: Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All ParticipantsNumber of Participants Achieving Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC)Month 12 (n=106)86 participants
All ParticipantsNumber of Participants Achieving Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC)Month 60 (n=50)38 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) 20 Response

ASAS measures symptomatic improvement in Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) participants. ASAS = 4 domains: participant global assessment of disease activity, pain, function, inflammation. ASAS 20 = 20% improvement from baseline and an absolute change \>= 10 units on a 0-100 scale (0=no disease activity; 100=high disease activity) for \>= 3 domains, and no worsening in remaining domain.

Time frame: Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All ParticipantsNumber of Participants With Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) 20 ResponseMonth 12 (n=103)75 participants
All ParticipantsNumber of Participants With Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) 20 ResponseMonth 60 (n=51)37 participants
Secondary

Number of Swollen and Tender Joints

Number of swollen joints was determined by examination of 66 joints and identifying when swelling was present. The number of swollen joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no swelling = 0, swelling =1. Number of tender joints was determined by examining 68 joints and identified the joints that were painful under pressure or to passive motion. The number of tender joints was recorded on the joint assessment form at each visit, no tenderness = 0, tenderness = 1.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsNumber of Swollen and Tender JointsBaseline: swollen joints (n=107)7.60 jointsStandard Deviation 6.39
All ParticipantsNumber of Swollen and Tender JointsBaseline: tender joints (n=107)16.97 jointsStandard Deviation 11.8
All ParticipantsNumber of Swollen and Tender JointsMonth 12: swollen joints (n=107)1.26 jointsStandard Deviation 2.54
All ParticipantsNumber of Swollen and Tender JointsMonth 12: tender joints (n=107)7.97 jointsStandard Deviation 10.18
All ParticipantsNumber of Swollen and Tender JointsMonth 60: swollen joints (n=55)0.96 jointsStandard Deviation 1.94
All ParticipantsNumber of Swollen and Tender JointsMonth 60: tender joints (n=55)5.49 jointsStandard Deviation 9.34
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: swollen joints and Month 12: swollen joints.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [5.1, 7.47]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: swollen joints and Month 60: swollen joints.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [4.48, 7.92]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12: swollen joints and Month 60: swollen joints.p-value: 0.47995% CI: [-0.36, 0.76]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: tender joints and Month 12: tender joints.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [6.86, 11.13]t-test, 1 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline: tender joints and Month 60: tender joints.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [6.1, 11.1]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12: tender joints and Month 60: tender joints.p-value: 0.58895% CI: [-1.76, 3.07]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Occiput-to-wall Distance

Occiput-to-wall distance: distance between the occiput (posterior or back portion of the head) and the wall when the participant stood with heels and shoulder against the wall and the back straight.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsOcciput-to-wall DistanceBaseline (n=51)7.02 cmStandard Deviation 6.24
All ParticipantsOcciput-to-wall DistanceMonth 12 (n=0)NA cm
All ParticipantsOcciput-to-wall DistanceMonth 60 (n=54)6.24 cmStandard Deviation 5.5
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: 0.67695% CI: [-1.666, 2.546]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Disease Activity Score

Measured using a 100 millimeter (mm) VAS ranging from 0 mm = very good to 100 mm = very bad.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsPatient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Disease Activity ScoreBaseline (n=107)63.51 mmStandard Deviation 17.25
All ParticipantsPatient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Disease Activity ScoreMonth 12 (n=107)32.07 mmStandard Deviation 22.33
All ParticipantsPatient Global Assessment (PtGA) of Disease Activity ScoreMonth 60 (n=55)33.16 mmStandard Deviation 24.5
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [26.44, 35.91]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [22.42, 35.1]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.53895% CI: [-8.7, 4.6]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) Response

ACR20 response: greater than or equal to (\>=) 20 percent (%) improvement in tender joint count; \>= 20% improvement in swollen joint count; and \>= 20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire \[HAQ\]); and C-Reactive Protein (CRP).

Time frame: Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) ResponseMonth 12 (n=107)62.6 percentage of participants
All ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) ResponseMonth 60 (n=51)70.6 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) Response

ACR50 response: \>= 50% improvement in tender joint count; \>= 50% improvement in swollen joint count; and \>= 50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and CRP.

Time frame: Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) ResponseMonth 12 (n=106)41.5 percentage of participants
All ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) ResponseMonth 60 (n=51)43.1 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) Response

ACR70 response: \>= 70% improvement in tender joint count; \>= 70% improvement in swollen joint count; and \>= 70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 remaining ACR core measures: participant assessment of pain; participant global assessment of disease activity; physician global assessment of disease activity; self-assessed disability (disability index of the HAQ); and CRP.

Time frame: Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) ResponseMonth 12 (n=106)19.8 percentage of participants
All ParticipantsPercentage of Participants With an American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) ResponseMonth 60 (n=52)26.9 percentage of participants
Secondary

Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease Activity

Physician Global Assessment of Disease Activity was measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS, with 0 mm = no disease activity.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsPhysician Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease ActivityBaseline (n=107)60.15 mmStandard Deviation 13.33
All ParticipantsPhysician Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease ActivityMonth 12 (n=107)26.43 mmStandard Deviation 18.53
All ParticipantsPhysician Global Assessment (PGA) of Disease ActivityMonth 60 (n=50)23.00 mmStandard Deviation 16.42
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [30.04, 37.63]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [31.96, 44.12]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.34395% CI: [-2.62, 7.38]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)

Combined assessment of lesion severity and area affected into single score. Body was divided into 4 sections: head, arms, trunk, legs. For each section, percent area of skin involved was estimated: 0= 0% to 6= 90-100%. Severity was estimated by clinical signs: erythema, induration, desquamation; scale: 0= none to 4= maximum. Final PASI = sum of severity parameters for each section\*area score\*weight of section (head: 0.1, arms: 0.2, body: 0.3, legs: 0.4); total possible score range: 0= no disease to 72= maximal disease.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsPsoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)Baseline (n=107)5.04 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.29
All ParticipantsPsoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)Month 12 (n=93)1.29 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.69
All ParticipantsPsoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)Month 60 (n=53)2.08 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.74
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.4, 5.1]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [1.65, 5.78]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.51895% CI: [-1.5, 0.76]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Radiographic Score Based on Wassenberg

Radiographic score based on wassenberg consisted of 2 sub-scores, proliferation score (PS) assessing bone proliferation and destruction score (DS) assessing joint surface destruction. Score range for PS and DS was 0 to 160 (where higher score represented higher bone proliferation) and 0 to 200 (where higher score represented higher destruction), respectively. Total score = sum of PS and DS (range 0 to 360); higher score represented worse state.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 12, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsRadiographic Score Based on WassenbergBaseline (n=77)13.58 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.21
All ParticipantsRadiographic Score Based on WassenbergMonth 12 (n=96)11.66 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.37
All ParticipantsRadiographic Score Based on WassenbergMonth 60 (n=14)28.29 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 32.93
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: 0.3395% CI: [-1.3, 3.82]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: 0.44995% CI: [-33.37, 16.26]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.16595% CI: [-37.04, 7.04]t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Visual Analogue Scale for Pain (VAS-pain)

100 mm line (VAS) marked by participant. Intensity of pain range (over past week): 0 = no pain to 100 = worst possible pain.

Time frame: Baseline, Month 6, Month 12, Month 18, Month 24, Month 60

Population: ITT population included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study medication. Here, 'n' is signifying those participants who were evaluated for this measure at the given time points.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All ParticipantsVisual Analogue Scale for Pain (VAS-pain)Month 12 (n=107)31.39 mmStandard Deviation 23.59
All ParticipantsVisual Analogue Scale for Pain (VAS-pain)Baseline (n=107)62.83 mmStandard Deviation 21.1
All ParticipantsVisual Analogue Scale for Pain (VAS-pain)Month 60 (n=51)31.92 mmStandard Deviation 26.51
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 12.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [25.88, 36.49]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Baseline and Month 60.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [21.52, 36.09]t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: Statistical analysis was carried out between categories, Month 12 and Month 60.p-value: 0.30195% CI: [-9.74, 3.07]t-test, 2 sided

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026