Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis
Conditions
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of MSB11022 and Humira® in adult participants with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Interventions
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis based on 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) criteria * At least 6 tender (of 68 assessed) and 6 swollen (of 66 assessed) joints at screening and baseline * Must have received methotrexate for at least 12 weeks and been on a stable dose for at least 4 weeks prior to the first study dose * Other protocol defined inclusion criteria could apply
Exclusion criteria
* Evidence of untreated or inadequately treated latent or active Tuberculosis * Evidence of uncontrolled, clinically significant diseases * Any second disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs must be washed out prior to the first study dose * Other protocol defined
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) | Up to Week 52 | Adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in participants, which does not necessarily have causal relationship with treatment. Term Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) is defined as AEs starting/worsening after first intake of the study drug. Hypersensitivity was the pre-defined TEAE of special Interest for this study. The percentage of participants with treatment emergent AESIs (hypersensitivity) were reported. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 52 | Percentage of participants with positive anti-Drug antibodies (ADAs) status to Adalimumab were reported. |
| Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 52 | Titer was defined as the degree to which the antibody-serum sample could be diluted and still contained detectable amounts of antibody. Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) titers for adalimumab was reported. Data was collected using validated bioanalytical method. |
| Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 52 | Percentage of participants with confirmed neutralizing antibodies status to Adalimumab were reported. |
| Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | The ACR 20 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 20 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=20 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP). |
| Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | The ACR 50 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 50 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=50 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP). |
| Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | The ACR 70 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 70 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=70 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP). |
| Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | DAS calculated on 28 joints is composite score derived from 4 measures: number of swollen joints (out of 28), number of tender joints (out of 28), Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity on visual analog scale (VAS). Overall disease activity score DAS28 was derived using following formulas from DAS28:DAS28=0.56\*√(TJC28)+0.28\*√(SJC28) + 0.014\*GH+0.70\*ln(ESR). Where: TJC28 = 28 joint count for tenderness, SJC28 = 28 joint count for swelling, ln(ESR) = natural log of ESR, GH = general health component of DAS (ie, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using scale of 1-100 where 100 is maximal activity); For analyses, GH divided by 10 & converted to 0.5 scale, i.e, 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5. DAS28-ESR of \>5.1 implies active disease, \<3.2 low disease activity, & \<2.6 remission. Change of 1.2(twice measurement error)=significant change of disease activity state. Overall score ranges from 0-10 where higher score means more severe disease. |
| Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Disease Activity Score calculated on 28 joints is composite score derived from 4 measures: number of swollen joints (out of 28), -number of tender joints (out of 28), -Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), -Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity on visual analog scale (VAS). Overall disease activity score DAS28 was derived using following formulas from DAS28: DAS28=0.56\*√(TJC28)+0.28\*√(SJC28) + 0.014\*GH+0.70\*ln(ESR). Where: -TJC28 = 28 joint count for tenderness, -SJC28 = 28 joint count for swelling, -ln(ESR) = natural logarithm of ESR, -GH = general health component of DAS (ie, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity); For analyses, GH was divided by 10 and converted to a 0.5 scale, i.e., 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5. DAS28-ESR of \>5.1 implies active disease, \<3.2 low disease activity, and \<2.6 remission. |
| Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | SDAI is numerical sum of 5 outcome parameters: tender & swollen joint count (based on 28-joint assessment), Patient's & Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (VAS) & level of C-reactive protein (CRP)(milligram per deciliter (mg/dL), normal\<1 mg/dL). SDAI was calculated based on following formula: SDAI = 28 joint count for swelling (SJC28) + 28 joint count for tenderness (TJC28)+GH+PGA+CRP Where: -GH =general health component of DAS (i.e. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity; For analyses, GH was divided by 10 & converted to 0.5 scale (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5).-PGA = Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity assessed using scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity. For analyses, PGA will be divided by 10 & converted to 0.5 scale (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5). where \[0-0.25\] = 0, \[0.25-0.75\] = 0.5, \[0.76-1.25\] = 1, etc. The total score range is 0-86 & lower score indicates less disease activity. |
| Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index (without acute-phase reactant) for assessing disease activity. The CDAI was calculated based on following formula: CDAI = 28 joint count for swelling (SJC28) + 28 joint count for tenderness (TJC28) + GH + PGA. Where, -GH = general health component of the DAS (i.e., Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using a scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity; for analyses, GH was divided by 10 and converted to a 0.5 scale, i.e., 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 etc. where \[0-0.25\] = 0, \[0.25-0.75\] = 0.5, \[0.76-1.25\] = 1, etc.). -PGA = Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity assessed using a scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity. For analyses, PGA was divided by 10 and converted to a 0.5 scale, ie, 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 etc. where \[0-0.25\] = 0, \[0.25-0.75\] = 0.5, \[0.76-1.25\] = 1, etc. The CDAI ranges from 0 to 76. Lower score indicates less disease activity. |
| Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 12 | Week 12 | The ACR 20 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 20 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=20 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: participant's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP). |
| Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death | Baseline up to Week 69 | Adverse event(AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in participants which does not necessarily have causal relationship with treatment. A serious adverse event(SAE) was AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect or was otherwise considered medically important. Term TEAE is defined as AEs starting/worsening after first intake of the study drug. All abnormal physical examinations occurring during the study have been reported as Adverse events. TEAEs included both Serious TEAEs and non-serious TEAEs. |
| Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Vital Signs | Up to Week 52 | Vital signs including body temperature, respiratory rate, and heart rate (after 5-minute rest) were measured. Percentage of participants with clinically meaningful abnormalities in vital signs were reported. Clinical meaningful was determined by the investigator. |
| Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Laboratory Values | Up to Week 52 | Laboratory parameters including hematology, urinalysis, and biochemistry analysis were analyzed. |
| Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52 | Week 12, 24, and 52 | Percentage of participants with clinically significant abnormal values for 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) at week 12, 24, and 52 were reported. |
| Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | For ANA, positivity is defined as any participant with ANA titer greater than (\>) 1:160 and negativity is defined as ANA titer less than (\<) 1:160. For anti-ds DNA, positivity is defined as any participant with adsDNA \> 15 units per milliliter (U/mL), intermediate category is defined as value between 10 U/mL to 15 U/mL and negativity is defined as adsDNA \< 10 U/mL. Percentage of participants with anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) and anti double-stranded deoxyribonucleic acid (Anti-dsDNA) at baseline, week 24 and 52 were reported. |
| Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | The HAQ-DI is a participant-reported questionnaire that is commonly used in RA to measure disease associated disability (assessment of physical function). It consists of several questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. HAQ-DI scores range from 0 to 3. The disability section of the questionnaire scores the participant's self-perception on the degree of difficulty (0 = without any difficulty, 1 = with some difficulty, 2 = with much difficulty, and 3 = unable to do). |
| Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | The Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a validated 36-item, patient-reported indication of overall health status not specific to any age, disease or Treatment group. The SF-36 questionnaire contains 36 questions pertaining to eight subscales of health status. These eight subscales were summarized as relating to either physical health or mental health. Physical component summary (PCS) is based primarily on physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, and general health scales and mental component summary (MCS) encompasses vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health scales. Score from mental health, role emotional, social functioning, and vitality domains were averaged to calculate MCS. Total score range for MCS was 0-100 (100=highest level of mental functioning). Score from physical function, role physical, bodily pain, and general health domains were averaged to calculate PCS. Total score range for PCS was 0-100 (100=highest level of physical functioning). |
| Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | EQ-5D-5L is a standardized, participant-rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D-5L includes 2 components: the EQ-5D-5L health state profile (descriptive system) and the EQ-5D-5L Visual Analog Scale. The EQ-5D-5L descriptive system provides a profile of the participant's health state 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 response options (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems) that reflect increasing levels of difficulty. The participant was asked to indicate his/her current health state by selecting the most appropriate level in each of the 5 dimensions. Responses to the 5 dimension scores were combined and converted into a single preference-weighted health utility index score 0 (0.0- worst health state) to 1 (1.0- better health state) representing the general health status of the individual based on the UK scoring algorithm. |
| Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | EQ-5D-5L: Standardized, participant-rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life. EQ-5D-5L includes 2 components: EQ-5D-5L health state profile (descriptive system) and EQ-5D-5L Visual Analog Scale. EQ-5D-5L descriptive system provides a profile of participant's health state 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 response options (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems) that reflect increasing levels of difficulty. Responses to 5 dimension scores were combined and converted into single preference-weighted health utility index score 0 (worst health state) to 1 (better health state). EQ-VAS: Self-rated health status using a vertical VAS. EQ-VAS records participant's perceptions of their own current overall health in range from 0 (worst imaginable health) to 100 (best imaginable health). |
| Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Immediately, 15 minutes and 1 hour post-injection on Baseline (Week 4), Week 6 and 8 | The participant's reported perception of pain was measured on a VAS where the slash drawn by the participant represents pain of increasing intensity. VAS score ranges from 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], where; 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain. The first 2 injections was administered by qualified personnel. The next three doses of IMP (3-5) will be self-administered by the participant and injection site pain was assessed. Pain was recorded immediately after, 15 minutes after, and 1 hour after the injections received by the participants. |
| Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | According to Boolean-based definition of remission of ACR/EULAR, a participant must satisfy all of the following: tender joint count \<= 1, swollen joint count \<= 1, CRP \<= 1 mg/dL, and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity \<= 1 (0 to 10 VAS). PGA was assessed on a 10 mm VAS ranging from 0 (very well) to 10 (very poor), where higher scores indicate worse health condition. |
Countries
Bulgaria, Czechia, Germany, Hungary, Poland, United Kingdom
Participant flow
Pre-assignment details
Participants were randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive either MSB11022 or EU-Humira for 48 weeks.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| MSB11022 Participants received MSB11022 (modified buffer and stabilizer) subcutaneously at dose of 40 milligram (mg) every other week from Day 1 up to Week 48. | 143 |
| EU-Humira Participants received EU-Humira subcutaneously at dose of 40 mg every other week from Day 1 up to Week 48. | 145 |
| Total | 288 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Adverse Event | 6 | 13 |
| Overall Study | Death | 0 | 2 |
| Overall Study | Lack of Efficacy | 1 | 2 |
| Overall Study | Lost to Follow-up | 2 | 4 |
| Overall Study | Other un-specified | 1 | 2 |
| Overall Study | Protocol Violation | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 10 | 9 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | EU-Humira | Total | MSB11022 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 54.0 Years STANDARD_DEVIATION 11 | 53.9 Years STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.5 | 53.9 Years STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.9 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 1 Participants | 4 Participants | 3 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 144 Participants | 284 Participants | 140 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 2 Participants | 2 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 143 Participants | 285 Participants | 142 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 119 Participants | 227 Participants | 108 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 26 Participants | 61 Participants | 35 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 143 | 2 / 145 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 15 / 143 | 34 / 145 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 8 / 143 | 15 / 145 |
Outcome results
Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI)
Adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in participants, which does not necessarily have causal relationship with treatment. Term Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) is defined as AEs starting/worsening after first intake of the study drug. Hypersensitivity was the pre-defined TEAE of special Interest for this study. The percentage of participants with treatment emergent AESIs (hypersensitivity) were reported.
Time frame: Up to Week 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) | 4.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) | 5.5 Percentage of Participants |
Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab
Titer was defined as the degree to which the antibody-serum sample could be diluted and still contained detectable amounts of antibody. Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) titers for adalimumab was reported. Data was collected using validated bioanalytical method.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here Number of participants analyzed signifies those who were evaluable for this outcome measure and Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 4 | 6.0 Titer |
| MSB11022 | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 24 | 16.0 Titer |
| MSB11022 | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 2 | 4.0 Titer |
| MSB11022 | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 36 | 16.0 Titer |
| MSB11022 | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 12 | 16.0 Titer |
| MSB11022 | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 52 | 16.0 Titer |
| MSB11022 | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Baseline | 4.0 Titer |
| EU-Humira | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 52 | 12.0 Titer |
| EU-Humira | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Baseline | 1.5 Titer |
| EU-Humira | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 2 | 12.0 Titer |
| EU-Humira | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 4 | 6.0 Titer |
| EU-Humira | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 12 | 16.0 Titer |
| EU-Humira | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 24 | 24.0 Titer |
| EU-Humira | Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Titer Levels for Adalimumab | Week 36 | 16.0 Titer |
Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is a composite index (without acute-phase reactant) for assessing disease activity. The CDAI was calculated based on following formula: CDAI = 28 joint count for swelling (SJC28) + 28 joint count for tenderness (TJC28) + GH + PGA. Where, -GH = general health component of the DAS (i.e., Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using a scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity; for analyses, GH was divided by 10 and converted to a 0.5 scale, i.e., 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 etc. where \[0-0.25\] = 0, \[0.25-0.75\] = 0.5, \[0.76-1.25\] = 1, etc.). -PGA = Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity assessed using a scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity. For analyses, PGA was divided by 10 and converted to a 0.5 scale, ie, 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 etc. where \[0-0.25\] = 0, \[0.25-0.75\] = 0.5, \[0.76-1.25\] = 1, etc. The CDAI ranges from 0 to 76. Lower score indicates less disease activity.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 2 | -10.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.3 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 4 | -17.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.2 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 8 | -23.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.6 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 12 | -27.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.5 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 24 | -30.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.9 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 52 | -31.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.2 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 24 | -27.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.7 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 2 | -8.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.9 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 12 | -24.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.7 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 4 | -15.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.7 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 52 | -28.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.6 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 8 | -20.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.9 |
Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
DAS calculated on 28 joints is composite score derived from 4 measures: number of swollen joints (out of 28), number of tender joints (out of 28), Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity on visual analog scale (VAS). Overall disease activity score DAS28 was derived using following formulas from DAS28:DAS28=0.56\*√(TJC28)+0.28\*√(SJC28) + 0.014\*GH+0.70\*ln(ESR). Where: TJC28 = 28 joint count for tenderness, SJC28 = 28 joint count for swelling, ln(ESR) = natural log of ESR, GH = general health component of DAS (ie, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using scale of 1-100 where 100 is maximal activity); For analyses, GH divided by 10 & converted to 0.5 scale, i.e, 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5. DAS28-ESR of \>5.1 implies active disease, \<3.2 low disease activity, & \<2.6 remission. Change of 1.2(twice measurement error)=significant change of disease activity state. Overall score ranges from 0-10 where higher score means more severe disease.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 2 | -0.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.9 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 4 | -1.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 8 | -1.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.9 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 12 | -2.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 24 | -2.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 52 | -2.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 24 | -2.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 2 | -0.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.9 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 12 | -2.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 4 | -1.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 52 | -2.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Score Based on a 28 Joint Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Change at Week 8 | -1.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52
SDAI is numerical sum of 5 outcome parameters: tender & swollen joint count (based on 28-joint assessment), Patient's & Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (VAS) & level of C-reactive protein (CRP)(milligram per deciliter (mg/dL), normal\<1 mg/dL). SDAI was calculated based on following formula: SDAI = 28 joint count for swelling (SJC28) + 28 joint count for tenderness (TJC28)+GH+PGA+CRP Where: -GH =general health component of DAS (i.e. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity; For analyses, GH was divided by 10 & converted to 0.5 scale (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5).-PGA = Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity assessed using scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity. For analyses, PGA will be divided by 10 & converted to 0.5 scale (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5). where \[0-0.25\] = 0, \[0.25-0.75\] = 0.5, \[0.76-1.25\] = 1, etc. The total score range is 0-86 & lower score indicates less disease activity.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 4 | -18.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.3 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 2 | -11.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.6 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 24 | -31.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.2 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 8 | -24.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.6 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 52 | -31.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.6 |
| MSB11022 | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 12 | -27.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.8 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 52 | -29.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.8 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 2 | -9.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 4 | -16.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.9 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 8 | -21.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 12 | -24.7 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.9 |
| EU-Humira | Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) Total Score at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Change at Week 24 | -27.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.6 |
Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52
EQ-5D-5L is a standardized, participant-rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D-5L includes 2 components: the EQ-5D-5L health state profile (descriptive system) and the EQ-5D-5L Visual Analog Scale. The EQ-5D-5L descriptive system provides a profile of the participant's health state 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 response options (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems) that reflect increasing levels of difficulty. The participant was asked to indicate his/her current health state by selecting the most appropriate level in each of the 5 dimensions. Responses to the 5 dimension scores were combined and converted into a single preference-weighted health utility index score 0 (0.0- worst health state) to 1 (1.0- better health state) representing the general health status of the individual based on the UK scoring algorithm.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline | 0.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.2 |
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 0.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.1 |
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 0.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.1 |
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 0.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.2 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 0.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.1 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline | 0.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.2 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 0.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.1 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 0.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.1 |
Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52
EQ-5D-5L: Standardized, participant-rated questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life. EQ-5D-5L includes 2 components: EQ-5D-5L health state profile (descriptive system) and EQ-5D-5L Visual Analog Scale. EQ-5D-5L descriptive system provides a profile of participant's health state 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 response options (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems) that reflect increasing levels of difficulty. Responses to 5 dimension scores were combined and converted into single preference-weighted health utility index score 0 (worst health state) to 1 (better health state). EQ-VAS: Self-rated health status using a vertical VAS. EQ-VAS records participant's perceptions of their own current overall health in range from 0 (worst imaginable health) to 100 (best imaginable health).
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline | 42.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 18.5 |
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 64.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 19.6 |
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 66.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.2 |
| MSB11022 | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 68.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 21.7 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 69.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.7 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline | 45.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 20.4 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 65.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 24.3 |
| EU-Humira | Euro-Quality of Life - 5 Dimension-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 63.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 20.9 |
Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52
The HAQ-DI is a participant-reported questionnaire that is commonly used in RA to measure disease associated disability (assessment of physical function). It consists of several questions referring to 8 domains: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. HAQ-DI scores range from 0 to 3. The disability section of the questionnaire scores the participant's self-perception on the degree of difficulty (0 = without any difficulty, 1 = with some difficulty, 2 = with much difficulty, and 3 = unable to do).
Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline | 1.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| MSB11022 | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 1.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| MSB11022 | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 1.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| MSB11022 | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 0.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.7 |
| EU-Humira | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 0.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| EU-Humira | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Baseline | 1.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| EU-Humira | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 1.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| EU-Humira | Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Total Score at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 1.1 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8
The participant's reported perception of pain was measured on a VAS where the slash drawn by the participant represents pain of increasing intensity. VAS score ranges from 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], where; 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain. The first 2 injections was administered by qualified personnel. The next three doses of IMP (3-5) will be self-administered by the participant and injection site pain was assessed. Pain was recorded immediately after, 15 minutes after, and 1 hour after the injections received by the participants.
Time frame: Immediately, 15 minutes and 1 hour post-injection on Baseline (Week 4), Week 6 and 8
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 6: Immediately post-injection | -1.4 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 5.12 |
| MSB11022 | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 6: 15 min post-injection | -0.2 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 2.67 |
| MSB11022 | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 6: 1 hour post-injection | 0.0 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 0.66 |
| MSB11022 | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 8: Immediately post-injection | -1.7 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 6.48 |
| MSB11022 | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 8: 15 min post-injection | -0.3 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 2.25 |
| MSB11022 | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 8: 1 hour post-injection | -0.1 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 0.57 |
| EU-Humira | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 8: 15 min post-injection | -0.7 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 4.12 |
| EU-Humira | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 6: Immediately post-injection | -1.3 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 10.16 |
| EU-Humira | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 8: Immediately post-injection | -2.3 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 10.35 |
| EU-Humira | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 6: 15 min post-injection | 0.4 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 3.29 |
| EU-Humira | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 8: 1 hour post-injection | -0.7 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 5.43 |
| EU-Humira | Mean Change From Baseline (Week 4) in Injection Site Pain as Assessed by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at Week 6 and 8 | Change at Week 6: 1 hour post-injection | 0.0 Millimeter (mm) | Standard Deviation 2.67 |
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 12
The ACR 20 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 20 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=20 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: participant's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), participant's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP).
Time frame: Week 12
Population: Intent-To-Treat (ITT) Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number of participants analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 12 | 79.6 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 12 | 80.9 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52
The ACR 20 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 20 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=20 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP).
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 52.1 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 88.5 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 71.1 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 81.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 30.0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 86.4 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 29.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 52.8 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 72.9 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 83.3 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
The ACR 50 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 50 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=50 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP).
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 6.4 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 17.6 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 40.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 54.2 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 65.5 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 64.5 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 60.6 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 6.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 51.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 19.4 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 66.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 34.7 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
The ACR 70 Response is defined as greater than or equal to (\>=) 70 percent improvement in swollen joint count (66 joints) and tender joint count (68 joints) and \>=70 percent improvement in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain using Visual Analog Scale (VAS ; 0-10 millimeter \[mm\], 0 mm=no pain and 10 mm=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity by using VAS (the scale ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, \[0 mm=no pain to 100 mm=worst possible pain\]), physician's global assessment of disease activity using VAS, participant's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas). The derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and acute-phase marker (CRP).
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 4.9 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 14.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 26.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 33.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 39.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 35.6 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 19.9 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 2.8 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 42.4 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology 70 (ACR70) Response at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 12.5 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
According to Boolean-based definition of remission of ACR/EULAR, a participant must satisfy all of the following: tender joint count \<= 1, swollen joint count \<= 1, CRP \<= 1 mg/dL, and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity \<= 1 (0 to 10 VAS). PGA was assessed on a 10 mm VAS ranging from 0 (very well) to 10 (very poor), where higher scores indicate worse health condition.
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 11.7 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 3.5 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 21.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 5.7 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 8 | 4.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 2 | 0.0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 4 | 1.4 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 12 | 12.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 24 | 8.4 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 52 | Week 52 | 13.6 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52
For ANA, positivity is defined as any participant with ANA titer greater than (\>) 1:160 and negativity is defined as ANA titer less than (\<) 1:160. For anti-ds DNA, positivity is defined as any participant with adsDNA \> 15 units per milliliter (U/mL), intermediate category is defined as value between 10 U/mL to 15 U/mL and negativity is defined as adsDNA \< 10 U/mL. Percentage of participants with anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) and anti double-stranded deoxyribonucleic acid (Anti-dsDNA) at baseline, week 24 and 52 were reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24 and 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: ANA: Negative | 78.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: Anti-dsDNA: Positive | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: ANA: Positive | 2.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: Anti-dsDNA: Negative | 95.7 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: ANA: Positive | 21.2 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: Anti-dsDNA: Intermediate | 2.2 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: ANA: Positive | 8.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: Anti-dsDNA: Positive | 2.2 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: Anti-dsDNA: Negative | 97.9 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: Anti-dsDNA: Negative | 95.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: ANA: Negative | 92.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: Anti-dsDNA: Intermediate | 0.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: Anti-dsDNA: Intermediate | 1.4 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: Anti-dsDNA: Positive | 4.1 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: ANA: Negative | 97.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: Anti-dsDNA: Positive | 0.8 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: ANA: Negative | 95.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: ANA: Positive | 4.9 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: ANA: Negative | 91.6 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: ANA: Positive | 8.4 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: ANA: Negative | 84.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: ANA: Positive | 15.3 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: Anti-dsDNA: Negative | 98.6 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: Anti-dsDNA: Intermediate | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Baseline: Anti-dsDNA: Positive | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: Anti-dsDNA: Negative | 96.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: Anti-dsDNA: Intermediate | 3.0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 24: Anti-dsDNA: Positive | 0.8 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: Anti-dsDNA: Negative | 97.5 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA) and Anti Double-stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid (Anti-dsDNA) at Baseline, Week 24 and 52 | Week 52: Anti-dsDNA: Intermediate | 1.7 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Laboratory Values
Laboratory parameters including hematology, urinalysis, and biochemistry analysis were analyzed.
Time frame: Up to Week 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Laboratory Values | 0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Laboratory Values | 0 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Vital Signs
Vital signs including body temperature, respiratory rate, and heart rate (after 5-minute rest) were measured. Percentage of participants with clinically meaningful abnormalities in vital signs were reported. Clinical meaningful was determined by the investigator.
Time frame: Up to Week 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Vital Signs | 0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Meaningful Differences in Vital Signs | 0 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52
Percentage of participants with clinically significant abnormal values for 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) at week 12, 24, and 52 were reported.
Time frame: Week 12, 24, and 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52 | Week 12 | 0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52 | Week 52 | 0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52 | Week 24 | 0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52 | Week 12 | 0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52 | Week 24 | 1.5 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Clinically Significant Abnormal Values for 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) at Week 12, 24, and 52 | Week 52 | 0.8 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab
Percentage of participants with confirmed neutralizing antibodies status to Adalimumab were reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here Number of participants analyzed signifies those who were evaluable for this outcome measure and Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 4 | 33.3 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 24 | 27.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 36 | 24.1 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 2 | 31.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 52 | 32.9 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 12 | 33.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Baseline | 45.5 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 24 | 29.3 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Baseline | 50.0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 2 | 40.9 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 4 | 30.0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 12 | 38.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 36 | 29.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Confirmed Neutralizing Antibodies (NAb) Status to Adalimumab | Week 52 | 39.2 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52
Disease Activity Score calculated on 28 joints is composite score derived from 4 measures: number of swollen joints (out of 28), -number of tender joints (out of 28), -Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), -Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity on visual analog scale (VAS). Overall disease activity score DAS28 was derived using following formulas from DAS28: DAS28=0.56\*√(TJC28)+0.28\*√(SJC28) + 0.014\*GH+0.70\*ln(ESR). Where: -TJC28 = 28 joint count for tenderness, -SJC28 = 28 joint count for swelling, -ln(ESR) = natural logarithm of ESR, -GH = general health component of DAS (ie, Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, assessed using scale of 1 to 100 where 100 is maximal activity); For analyses, GH was divided by 10 and converted to a 0.5 scale, i.e., 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5. DAS28-ESR of \>5.1 implies active disease, \<3.2 low disease activity, and \<2.6 remission.
Time frame: Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 2 | 10.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 4 | 20.6 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 8 | 33.1 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 12 | 46.5 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 24 | 55.1 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 52 | 57.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 2 | 3.6 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 4 | 7.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 8 | 18.3 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 12 | 29.6 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 24 | 31.2 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 52 | 40.5 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 24 | 34.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 2 | 8.3 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 2 | 2.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 4 | 16.0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 12 | 24.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 8 | 33.3 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 4 | 6.9 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 12 | 42.6 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 52 | 36.4 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 24 | 53.8 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Remission: Week 8 | 16.0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count- Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) Low Disease Activity and Remission at Week 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 | Low Disease Activity: Week 52 | 56.8 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab
Percentage of participants with positive anti-Drug antibodies (ADAs) status to Adalimumab were reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 52
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 4 | 29.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 24 | 71.9 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 2 | 20.3 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 36 | 66.9 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 12 | 54.2 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 52 | 60.8 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Baseline | 7.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 52 | 62.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Baseline | 4.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 2 | 15.2 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 4 | 21.3 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 12 | 48.6 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 24 | 61.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Positive Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) Status to Adalimumab | Week 36 | 65.3 Percentage of Participants |
Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death
Adverse event(AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in participants which does not necessarily have causal relationship with treatment. A serious adverse event(SAE) was AE that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death; life threatening; persistent/significant disability/incapacity; initial/prolonged inpatient hospitalization; congenital anomaly/birth defect or was otherwise considered medically important. Term TEAE is defined as AEs starting/worsening after first intake of the study drug. All abnormal physical examinations occurring during the study have been reported as Adverse events. TEAEs included both Serious TEAEs and non-serious TEAEs.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 69
Population: The Safety Analysis Set included all randomized participants who received at least one dose of study treatment.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death | TEAEs | 58.0 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death | Serious TEAEs | 4.9 Percentage of Participants |
| MSB11022 | Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death | TEAEs Leading to Death | 0 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death | TEAEs | 64.1 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death | Serious TEAEs | 9.7 Percentage of Participants |
| EU-Humira | Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and TEAEs Leading to Death | TEAEs Leading to Death | 0.7 Percentage of Participants |
Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52
The Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a validated 36-item, patient-reported indication of overall health status not specific to any age, disease or Treatment group. The SF-36 questionnaire contains 36 questions pertaining to eight subscales of health status. These eight subscales were summarized as relating to either physical health or mental health. Physical component summary (PCS) is based primarily on physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, and general health scales and mental component summary (MCS) encompasses vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health scales. Score from mental health, role emotional, social functioning, and vitality domains were averaged to calculate MCS. Total score range for MCS was 0-100 (100=highest level of mental functioning). Score from physical function, role physical, bodily pain, and general health domains were averaged to calculate PCS. Total score range for PCS was 0-100 (100=highest level of physical functioning).
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52
Population: ITT Analysis Set included all participants randomly allocated to a treatment, based on intent to treat as randomized principle (planned treatment regimen rather than actual treatment given in case of any difference). Here Number analyzed signifies those participants who were evaluable for this outcome measure at specified time points.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Baseline | 30.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.6 |
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Week 12 | 39.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.9 |
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Week 24 | 40.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 8.8 |
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Week 52 | 41.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.5 |
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Baseline | 40.9 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13.2 |
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Week 12 | 47.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.3 |
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Week 24 | 49.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.8 |
| MSB11022 | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Week 52 | 48.0 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.4 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Week 52 | 49.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.5 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Baseline | 30.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 7.8 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Baseline | 43.4 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.7 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Week 12 | 38.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 8.6 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Week 24 | 48.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.9 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Week 24 | 40.8 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.1 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | MCS: Week 12 | 48.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.3 |
| EU-Humira | Short-Form Health Survey- 36 Items (SF-36) at Baseline, Week 12, 24 and 52 | PCS: Week 52 | 41.6 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.3 |