Skip to content

The Safety and Efficacy of the Buprenorphine Transdermal System (BTDS) in Subjects With Chronic Back Pain.

A Comparative Study of Buprenorphine TDS, Oxycodone/ Acetaminophen Tablets Qid and Placebo in Patients With Chronic Back Pain

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00315445
Acronym
BP96-0604
Enrollment
134
Registered
2006-04-18
Start date
1997-12-31
Completion date
1998-05-31
Last updated
2012-09-03

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

Conditions

Back Pain

Keywords

chronic back pain, opioid, transdermal

Brief summary

The objective of this study is to assess the safety of the buprenorphine transdermal system (5, 10, and 20) in comparison to placebo transdermal system and immediate release oxycodone/ acetaminophen in subjects with chronic back pain. The double-blind treatment intervention duration is 84 days during which time supplemental analgesic medication (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) will be allowed for all subjects in addition to study drug.

Detailed description

Buprenorphine is a synthetic opioid analgesic with over twenty-five years of international clinical experience indicating it to be safe and effective in a variety of therapeutic situations for the relief of moderate to severe pain.

Interventions

Buprenorphine 5, 10, or 20 mcg/hour patch applied transdermally for 7-day wear.

DRUGPlacebo oxycodone/acetaminophen tablets

Placebo oxycodone/acetaminophen tablets; 1, 2, or 3 tablets taken four times/day.

DRUGOXY/APAP

5 mg oxycodone / 325 mg acetaminophen tablets; 1, 2, or 3 tablets taken four times/day.

DRUGPlacebo transdermal patch (TDS)

Placebo transdermal patch 5, 10, or 20 applied transdermally for 7-day wear

Sponsors

Purdue Pharma LP
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* clinical evidence of stable, chronic (\>2 months) back pain related to intervertebral disc disease, nerve root entrapment, spondylolithesis, and osteoarthritis or other, similar nonmalignant conditions. * unacceptable pain control despite currently taking a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug considered at a therapeutic and/or tolerated dose or, subjects currently taking \</=2 short-acting opioid doses per day, or subjects taking 3-12 short-acting opioid doses per day.

Exclusion criteria

* receiving opioids at an average daily dose of \>90 mg of oral morphine equivalents or receiving more than 12 tablets per day of short-acting opioid-containing products. * scheduled to have surgery (including dental) involving the use of preoperative or postoperative analgesics or anesthetics during the study period. Other protocol-specific exclusion/inclusion criteria may apply.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain on the Average, Mean Change From Baseline Days 21-84 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])On baseline day 1 and days 21, 30, 45, 60, 75, and 84, and, if applicable, at early termination.Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that best describes your pain on the average since your last visit. 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine it.
Pain Right Now, Mean Change From Baseline, Days 21-84 (LOCF)Assessed at baseline day 1 and days 21, 30, 45, 60, 75, and 84, and, if applicable, at early termination.Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that tells how much pain you have right now. Subjects rated their answers on a 0-10 ordinal scale from 0 = No pain to 10 = Pain as bad as you can imagine it. Pain right now is presented as the LSmean \[change from baseline\] (SE).

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Physical Functioning Scale of the Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) 36 Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): Mean Percent ± Standard Error of the Mean (SEM) at Day 84 (LOCF)Day 84, or, if applicable, at early terminationThe Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) Short-Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Physical Functioning is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.
Physical Role Scale (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84(LOCF)Day 84The Medical Outcomes Survey Short-Form-36 health survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Physical Role is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.
Bodily Pain (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent at Day 84 (LOCF)Day 84The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Bodily Pain is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.
General Health (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)Day 84The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. General Health is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.
Vitality (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)Day 84The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Vitality is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.
Social Functioning (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)Day 84The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Social Functioning is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic.
Subject Satisfaction: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)Day 84The subject assessed satisfaction with study drug. The assessment was completed by the subject using a 0-3 ordinal scale from 0 = No response to 3 = Marked response.
Mental Health (MOS SF-36):Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)Day 84The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Mental Health is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic.
Therapeutic Response - Investigator: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)Day 84The therapeutic response was rated by the investigator. The assessment was completed by the investigator using a 0-3 ordinal scale from 0 = No response to 3 = Marked response.
Therapeutic Response - Subject: Mean ± SEM (Day 84) (LOCF)Day 84The therapeutic response was rated by the subject. The assessment was completed by the subject using a 0-3 ordinal scale from 0 = No response to 3 = Marked response.
Time to Stable Pain ManagementStart of study to day 21.For each subject, time to stable pain management is defined as the first (post-baseline) time during the titration period when his/her diary pain was 4 or less (or at least 2 points lower than baseline) for 3 consecutive daily records or the pain on the average (at the day 7 or day 21 visit) was 4 or less (or at least 2 points lower than baseline).
The Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of EfficacyTime after dosing to dropout due to lack of efficacyDropouts due to various reasons were summarized by counts and percentage. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the treatment differences in time to dropout due to lack of efficacy. Clinically important covariates (including gender, age, race, weight, baseline pain, and previous opioid use) were incorporated into the model when statistically significant at P\< .10, using a backward elimination procedure.
Emotional Role (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)Day 84The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Emotional Role is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic.
Subject Comparison to Prestudy Analgesic: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)Day 84The subject compared study drug treatment to prestudy analgesic. The assessment was completed by the subject using a 0-2 ordinal scale from 0 = Worse than prestudy medicine to 2 = Better than prestudy medicine.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

10-Dec-1997 (first subject, first visit) to 08-May-1998 (last subject last visit) in 13 centers in the United States

Pre-assignment details

This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BTDS in comparison with current pharmacotherapeutic pain management practice and placebo in opioid-naïve or opioid-experienced adult subjects with chronic back pain not manageable with nonopioid analgesics alone (range, 19-85 years).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Placebo
Placebo oxycodone/acetaminophen (APAP) 1, 2, or 3 tablets four times/day and transdermal patch (TDS) placebo 5, 10, or 20 applied for 7-day wear.
45
OXY/APAP
5 mg oxycodone/325 mg acetaminophen, 1, 2, or 3 tablets four times/day.
43
BTDS
Buprenorphine transdermal patch 5, 10, or 20 mcg/hour applied for 7-day wear.
46
Total134

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002
Overall StudyAdverse Event71215
Overall StudyLack of Efficacy1617
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up101
Overall StudyOther130
Overall StudyProtocol Violation201

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicOXY/APAPBTDSTotalPlacebo
Age Continuous49 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.5
54 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.2
52 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.31
52 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.2
Opioid Experience
Opioid experienced
9 participants12 participants27 participants6 participants
Opioid Experience
Opioid naive
34 participants34 participants107 participants39 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
27 Participants28 Participants80 Participants25 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
16 Participants18 Participants54 Participants20 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
20 / 4535 / 4337 / 46
serious
Total, serious adverse events
2 / 453 / 433 / 46

Outcome results

Primary

Pain on the Average, Mean Change From Baseline Days 21-84 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that best describes your pain on the average since your last visit. 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine it.

Time frame: On baseline day 1 and days 21, 30, 45, 60, 75, and 84, and, if applicable, at early termination.

Population: All 134 subjects randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and safety analyses. ITT Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from study because the informed consent was never obtained. This subject had no efficacy data but was included the analysis of discontinuation due to lack of efficacy.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPain on the Average, Mean Change From Baseline Days 21-84 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])-1.01 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.37
OXY/APAPPain on the Average, Mean Change From Baseline Days 21-84 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])-1.82 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.36
BTDSPain on the Average, Mean Change From Baseline Days 21-84 (Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF])-1.92 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.34
Comparison: A repeated measures analysis was performed to assess the effects due to treatment, center, and treatment by center interaction. Observations within each subject were assumed to follow a first-order autoregressive model. Missing values were extrapolated by the last observation carried forward (LOCF). Covariates were gender, age, race, weight, baseline pain, and previous opioid use which were incorporated into the model when P \< 0.10, using a backward elimination procedure.p-value: 0.035Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.0624Mixed Models Analysis
Primary

Pain Right Now, Mean Change From Baseline, Days 21-84 (LOCF)

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that tells how much pain you have right now. Subjects rated their answers on a 0-10 ordinal scale from 0 = No pain to 10 = Pain as bad as you can imagine it. Pain right now is presented as the LSmean \[change from baseline\] (SE).

Time frame: Assessed at baseline day 1 and days 21, 30, 45, 60, 75, and 84, and, if applicable, at early termination.

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPain Right Now, Mean Change From Baseline, Days 21-84 (LOCF)-0.80 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.38
OXY/APAPPain Right Now, Mean Change From Baseline, Days 21-84 (LOCF)-1.53 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.37
BTDSPain Right Now, Mean Change From Baseline, Days 21-84 (LOCF)-1.66 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.34
Comparison: A repeated measures analysis was performed to assess the effects due to treatment, center, and treatment by center interaction. Observations within each subject were assumed to follow a first-order autoregressive model. Missing values were extrapolated by the last observation carried forward (LOCF). Covariates were gender, age, race, weight, baseline pain, and previous opioid use which were incorporated into the model when P \< 0.10, using a backward elimination procedure.p-value: 0.0452Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.0962Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Bodily Pain (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent at Day 84 (LOCF)

The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Bodily Pain is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboBodily Pain (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent at Day 84 (LOCF)35.3 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.1
OXY/APAPBodily Pain (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent at Day 84 (LOCF)39.0 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.4
BTDSBodily Pain (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent at Day 84 (LOCF)41.9 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.1
90% CI: [24.3, 35.6]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [29, 40.3]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [32.1, 42.5]Day 84 Mean
Secondary

Emotional Role (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)

The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Emotional Role is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboEmotional Role (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)55.3 Units on a scaleStandard Error 6.7
OXY/APAPEmotional Role (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)56.3 Units on a scaleStandard Error 7.1
BTDSEmotional Role (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)63.0 Units on a scaleStandard Error 6.2
90% CI: [49.8, 67.9]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [45.9, 65.3]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [53.1, 70.9]Day 84 Mean
Secondary

General Health (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)

The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. General Health is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboGeneral Health (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)52.4 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.5
OXY/APAPGeneral Health (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)52.5 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.5
BTDSGeneral Health (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)57.7 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.4
90% CI: [50.3, 56.6]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [51.8, 58.3]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [52.3, 58.6]Day 84 Mean
Secondary

Mental Health (MOS SF-36):Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)

The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Mental Health is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMental Health (MOS SF-36):Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)67.4 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.1
OXY/APAPMental Health (MOS SF-36):Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)68.8 Units on a scaleStandard Error 2.7
BTDSMental Health (MOS SF-36):Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)67.8 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.3
90% CI: [61.3, 68.6]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [61.7, 68.8]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [62, 68.7]Day 84 Mean
Secondary

Physical Functioning Scale of the Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) 36 Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): Mean Percent ± Standard Error of the Mean (SEM) at Day 84 (LOCF)

The Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) Short-Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Physical Functioning is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.

Time frame: Day 84, or, if applicable, at early termination

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPhysical Functioning Scale of the Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) 36 Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): Mean Percent ± Standard Error of the Mean (SEM) at Day 84 (LOCF)46.4 Units on a scaleStandard Error 4
OXY/APAPPhysical Functioning Scale of the Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) 36 Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): Mean Percent ± Standard Error of the Mean (SEM) at Day 84 (LOCF)44.5 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.9
BTDSPhysical Functioning Scale of the Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) 36 Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): Mean Percent ± Standard Error of the Mean (SEM) at Day 84 (LOCF)46.5 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.6
90% CI: [40.2, 48.7]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [43.3, 52.4]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [41.7, 50.2]Day 84 Mean
Secondary

Physical Role Scale (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84(LOCF)

The Medical Outcomes Survey Short-Form-36 health survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Physical Role is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPhysical Role Scale (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84(LOCF)18.9 Units on a scaleStandard Error 4.8
OXY/APAPPhysical Role Scale (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84(LOCF)24.4 Units on a scaleStandard Error 5.9
BTDSPhysical Role Scale (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84(LOCF)33.9 Units on a scaleStandard Error 5.8
90% CI: [5.2, 26.2]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [10.7, 32]Day 84 Mean
90% CI: [16, 35.2]Day 84 Mean
Secondary

Social Functioning (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)

The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Social Functioning is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSocial Functioning (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)53.3 Units on a scaleStandard Error 4.2
OXY/APAPSocial Functioning (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)59.5 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.9
BTDSSocial Functioning (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)65.2 Units on a scaleStandard Error 4.4
Secondary

Subject Comparison to Prestudy Analgesic: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)

The subject compared study drug treatment to prestudy analgesic. The assessment was completed by the subject using a 0-2 ordinal scale from 0 = Worse than prestudy medicine to 2 = Better than prestudy medicine.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSubject Comparison to Prestudy Analgesic: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)0.9 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.1
OXY/APAPSubject Comparison to Prestudy Analgesic: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)1.4 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.1
BTDSSubject Comparison to Prestudy Analgesic: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)1.4 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.1
Secondary

Subject Satisfaction: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)

The subject assessed satisfaction with study drug. The assessment was completed by the subject using a 0-3 ordinal scale from 0 = No response to 3 = Marked response.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSubject Satisfaction: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)2.2 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.1
OXY/APAPSubject Satisfaction: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)1.8 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.1
BTDSSubject Satisfaction: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)1.7 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.2
Secondary

Therapeutic Response - Investigator: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)

The therapeutic response was rated by the investigator. The assessment was completed by the investigator using a 0-3 ordinal scale from 0 = No response to 3 = Marked response.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboTherapeutic Response - Investigator: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)1.1 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.2
OXY/APAPTherapeutic Response - Investigator: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)2.0 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.2
BTDSTherapeutic Response - Investigator: Mean ± SEM (Day 84)(LOCF)1.9 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.2
Secondary

Therapeutic Response - Subject: Mean ± SEM (Day 84) (LOCF)

The therapeutic response was rated by the subject. The assessment was completed by the subject using a 0-3 ordinal scale from 0 = No response to 3 = Marked response.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboTherapeutic Response - Subject: Mean ± SEM (Day 84) (LOCF)1.1 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.2
OXY/APAPTherapeutic Response - Subject: Mean ± SEM (Day 84) (LOCF)2.1 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.1
BTDSTherapeutic Response - Subject: Mean ± SEM (Day 84) (LOCF)2.0 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.2
Secondary

The Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of Efficacy

Dropouts due to various reasons were summarized by counts and percentage. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the treatment differences in time to dropout due to lack of efficacy. Clinically important covariates (including gender, age, race, weight, baseline pain, and previous opioid use) were incorporated into the model when statistically significant at P\< .10, using a backward elimination procedure.

Time frame: Time after dosing to dropout due to lack of efficacy

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn because the informed consent was never obtained and had no efficacy data.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboThe Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of EfficacyNA Days
OXY/APAPThe Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of EfficacyNA Days
BTDSThe Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of EfficacyNA Days
p-value: 0.0105Regression, Cox
p-value: 0.0024Regression, Cox
Secondary

Time to Stable Pain Management

For each subject, time to stable pain management is defined as the first (post-baseline) time during the titration period when his/her diary pain was 4 or less (or at least 2 points lower than baseline) for 3 consecutive daily records or the pain on the average (at the day 7 or day 21 visit) was 4 or less (or at least 2 points lower than baseline).

Time frame: Start of study to day 21.

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboTime to Stable Pain Management14 Days
OXY/APAPTime to Stable Pain Management7 Days
BTDSTime to Stable Pain Management7 Days
p-value: 0.054Regression, Cox
p-value: 0.138Regression, Cox
Secondary

Vitality (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)

The MOS Short-Form Health Survey assesses 8 categories of functionality through 36 individual questions. Vitality is 1 of the 8 categories. Its transformed score, scaled from 0% to 100%, is used. A higher score represents a better subject condition. The survey was completed by the subject at the clinic. The mean scores were analyzed.

Time frame: Day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboVitality (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)39.0 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.7
OXY/APAPVitality (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)42.9 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.7
BTDSVitality (MOS SF-36): Mean Percent ± SEM at Day 84 (LOCF)41.2 Units on a scaleStandard Error 3.5
Post Hoc

Sensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21 - 84) Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that best describes your pain on the average since your last visit. 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine it.

Time frame: Baseline to days 21 - 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21 - 84) Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)-0.77 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.38
OXY/APAPSensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21 - 84) Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)-1.70 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.38
BTDSSensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21 - 84) Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)-1.74 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.35
p-value: 0.033Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.043Mixed Models Analysis
Post Hoc

Sensitivity Analysis Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that best describes your pain on the average since your last visit. 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine it. This is a multiple imputation method that requires imputed changes from baseline to be stratified by discontinuation (D/C) reason. If subject D/C'd due to AE, the baseline observation was carried forward (ie, BOCF method of imputation). If subject D/C'd other than for an AE, the last missing data prior to D/C of study drug was carried forward (ie, LOCF method of imputation).

Time frame: Baseline to days 21-84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSensitivity Analysis Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-0.91 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.39
OXY/APAPSensitivity Analysis Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.77 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.39
BTDSSensitivity Analysis Pain on the Average Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.86 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.35
p-value: 0.038Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.63Mixed Models Analysis
Post Hoc

Sensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that best describes your pain on the average since your last visit. 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine it. This is a multiple imputation method that requires imputed changes from baseline to be stratified by discontinuation (D/C) reason. If subject D/C'd due to AE, the baseline observation was carried forward (ie, BOCF method of imputation). If subject D/C'd other than for an AE, the last missing data prior to D/C of study drug was carried forward (ie, LOCF method of imputation).

Time frame: Baseline to day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.44 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.44
OXY/APAPSensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.47 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.44
BTDSSensitivity Analysis: Pain on the Average Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.70 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.4
p-value: 0.607Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.94Mixed Models Analysis
Post Hoc

Sensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84), BOCF

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that tells how much pain you have right now. Subjects rated their answers on a 0-10 ordinal scale from 0 = No pain to 10 = Pain as bad as you can imagine it. Primary back pain was measured.

Time frame: Baseline to days 21-84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84), BOCF-0.53 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.37
OXY/APAPSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84), BOCF-1.46 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.37
BTDSSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84), BOCF-1.64 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.33
p-value: 0.011Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.034Mixed Models Analysis
Post Hoc

Sensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that tells how much pain you have right now. Subjects rated their answers on a 0-10 ordinal scale from 0 = No pain to 10 = Pain as bad as you can imagine it. This is a multiple imputation method that requires imputed changes from baseline to be stratified by discontinuation (D/C) reason. If subject D/C'd from study due to AE, the baseline observation was carried forward (BOCF). If subject D/C'd from study other than for AE, the last missing data prior to D/C of study drug was carried forward (LOCF).

Time frame: Baseline to days 21-84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-0.78 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.38
OXY/APAPSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.60 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.38
BTDSSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline in the Maintenance Period (Days 21-84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.59 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.34
p-value: 0.064Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.066Mixed Models Analysis
Post Hoc

Sensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)

Subjects were asked, Please rate your pain by circling the one number (0-10) that tells how much pain you have right now. Subjects rated their answers on a 0-10 ordinal scale from 0 = No pain to 10 = Pain as bad as you can imagine it. This is a multiple imputation method that requires imputed changes from baseline to be stratified by discontinuation (D/C) reason. If subject D/C'd from study due to AE, the baseline observation was carried forward (BOCF). If subject D/C'd from study other than for AE, the last missing data prior to D/C of study drug was carried forward (LOCF).

Time frame: Baseline to day 84

Population: All 134 subjects who were randomized and received study drug were included in the intent-to-treat and safety analyses. No subjects were excluded.~Intent-to-treat Subjects With Efficacy Data (N = 133) 1 subject was withdrawn from the study because the informed consent was never obtained.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.30 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.45
OXY/APAPSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.56 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.45
BTDSSensitivity Analysis: Pain Right Now Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (Day 84) (Hybrid BOCF/LOCF)-1.50 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.41
p-value: 0.702Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.634Mixed Models Analysis

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