Skip to content

Study of Efficacy and Safety of AIN457/Secukinumab in Patients With Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy

A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel Group, Multicenter, 24-week Study Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of Secukinumab Compared to Placebo in Adult Patients With Moderate to Severe Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy and Failure to Conventional Therapy

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05569174
Acronym
UnchAIN
Enrollment
62
Registered
2022-10-06
Start date
2022-12-02
Completion date
2024-12-18
Last updated
2026-01-23

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

Conditions

Tendinopathy

Keywords

shoulder, rotator cuff, IL-17A-Ab, AIN457X, Impingement syndrome

Brief summary

The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of secukinumab subcutaneously (s.c.) compared to placebo in adult patients with moderate to severe rotator cuff tendinopathy and failure to conventional therapy.

Detailed description

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, Phase IIIb, 24-week study to investigate the superior efficacy of secukinumab and safety in participants with rotator cuff tendinopathy. Secukinumab 300 mg s.c. was compared to placebo (both arms in combination with patient individualized conventional therapy) in relieving clinical symptoms at Week 24. The study consisted of a screening period up to 6 weeks, a 2-week run-in period, a 12-week treatment period and a 12-week follow-up period. Treatment and follow-up periods were blinded. Participants who met the eligibility criteria at screening continued to the run-in period and were randomized. In the run-in period, participants performed 2 weeks of home-based standardized physiotherapy.

Interventions

DRUGSecukinumab

Secukinumab 300 mg s.c for 12 weeks in a pre-filled syringe (PFS)

OTHERPlacebo

Placebo to match secukinumab s.c. for 12 weeks in a PFS

Sponsors

Novartis Pharmaceuticals
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

Parallel Assignment

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Signed informed consent had to be obtained prior to participation in the study. * Males and non-pregnant, non-nursing females were between 18 and 65 years of age. * Rotator cuff tendinopathy (unilateral) was present with a positive "Painful Arc Test" on examination. * Symptoms had been present for at least 6 weeks but not more than 6 months at Baseline. * Moderate to severe rotator cuff tendinopathy was demonstrated by all of the following criteria: 1. WORC score was ≤ 40 at Baseline. 2. NRS pain score was ≥ 5 at Baseline and for at least 3 days of the 7 days prior to Baseline. 3. Nocturnal pain occurred at least 4 out of the 7 days in the week prior to Baseline. * Patients had failed at least 8 weeks of conventional therapy prior to Baseline: inadequate response to NSAIDs and/or paracetamol and physiotherapy; or intolerance to NSAIDs and/or paracetamol.

Exclusion criteria

* Greater than 50% partial thickness tear had been established by MRI or ultrasound during assessment in the Run-in phase. * Patients were expected to require glucocorticoid treatment throughout the trial duration at Baseline (e.g., systemic, intramuscular, local injections in shoulder). * Previous surgery, or plans for surgery, during the study period, in the affected shoulder. * Rheumatologic and chronic inflammatory diseases, including but not limited to inflammatory bowel disease, polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), PsA, axSpA and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), fibromyalgia or - severe pain disorder unrelated to the target shoulder. * Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) antibodies were positive at Screening. * History of adhesive capsulitis/frozen shoulder or calcification in the tendon (in affected or contralateral shoulder) had been confirmed clinically or by medical imaging. * Symptomatic osteoarthritis of the shoulder (glenohumeral, acromioclavicular) in affected or contralateral shoulder had been confirmed by medical imaging. * Patients had traumatic rupture that would have been considered eligible for surgery for repair of cuff tear. * Neurological conditions including but not limited to cervical radiculopathy, which in the opinion of the investigator could have explained the patient's symptoms. * Any intra-articular/subacromial glucocorticoid treatment had occurred within 12 weeks prior to Baseline or more than 2 injections for the current tendinopathy. * Any oral, intramuscular or i.v. glucocorticoid treatment had occurred 12 weeks prior to Baseline or during the current tendinopathy, whichever was longer. * Previous platelet rich plasma (PRP) injections or fluoroquinolone/quinolone antibiotics had occurred within 12 weeks prior to Baseline or during the current tendinopathy, whichever was longer. * Neuromuscular or primary/secondary muscular deficiency had limited the ability to perform functional measurement (e.g., shoulder strength test). * Previous hyaluronic injections had occurred within 12 weeks prior to Baseline or during the current tendinopathy, whichever was longer.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Percentage Score at Week 24Baseline, Week 24The WORC Index consisted of 21 items divided into 5 Domains: Physical Symptoms (6 items), Sport/Recreation (4 items), Work Function (4 items), Lifestyle Function (4 items) and Emotional Function (3 items). Each of the 21 items in the WORC was rated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (no impact on quality of life) to 100 (worst possible impact). Thus, the total score ranged from 0 to 2100 points. The score was reported as a percentage of normal by subtracting the total score from 2100, dividing by 2100, and multiplying by 100. Total final WORC percentage scores ranged from 0%, the lowest functional status level, to 100%, the highest functional status level. Change from baseline in the WORC percentage total score was assessed at Week 24. A positive change from baseline indicated an improvement.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Baseline, Week 24The WORC Index consisted of 21 items divided into 5 Domains: Physical Symptoms (6 items), Sport/Recreation (4 items), Work Function (4 items), Lifestyle Function (4 items) and Emotional Function (3 items). Each of the 21 items in the WORC was rated using a VAS ranging from 0 (no impact on quality of life) to 100 (worst possible impact). Each subdomain score was calculated as a percentage of normal function, ranging from 0% (worst condition) to 100% (best condition). Change from baseline in the WORC Index percentage sub-domain score was assessed at Week 24. A positive change from baseline indicated an improvement
Change From Baseline in Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity Score at Week 24Baseline, Week 24The participant's global assessment of disease activity was performed using 100 mm VAS ranging from 0="no activity" to 100= "most active", after the question " Please indicate with a vertical mark ( \| ) through the horizontal line the global activity of your disease in the last 24 hours". Change from baseline in the participant's global assessment of disease activity score was assessed at Week 24. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement
Change From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Baseline, Week 24The SF-36 Health Survey was a validated questionnaire assessing health-related quality of life. Participants completed the survey throughout the study, reflecting their health status over the previous 4 weeks. It consisted of eight subscales that were scored individually; and two overall summary scores, the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS). Component summary scores (PCS and MCS) were derived from weighted combinations of the eight subscales. Each domain and component summary score ranged from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. Change from baseline to Week 24 in all subscale and summary scores was assessed, where a positive change indicated improvement.
Change From Baseline in Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire Score at Week 24Baseline, Week 24The QuickDASH was an abbreviated form of the DASH. The QuickDASH Index was self-administered and used 11 items to measure physical function and symptoms in participants with any or multiple musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb. It had a recall period of 1 week. Each item of the QuickDASH had five response options. The raw score was calculated as the sum of responses, converted to an average, and rescaled to a total score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 100 (most severe disability) Change from baseline to Week 24 was assessed. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement.
Change From Baseline in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Pain Score at Week 24Baseline, Week 24The score for pain was assessed by using an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 "no pain at all" to 10 "worst possible pain", after the question "On a numeric scale of 0-10 where would you rate your pain at this time". Change from baseline to Wek 24 was assessed. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement
Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- Total ScoreBaseline, Week 24The EQ-5D-5L was a standardized instrument used to evaluate patients' overall health-related quality of life (QoL). It consisted of two components: the descriptive system and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). The descriptive system assessed five dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension was rated on five levels, from 1 (no problems) to 5 (extreme problems). These ratings were combined to generate a composite health index, which could be converted into a single summary health utility score using published value sets. Total scores ranged from 0 to 1, with lower scores indicating greater health impairment. Changes in total scores from baseline to Week 24 were analyzed, with positive changes indicating improvement in health-related quality of life.
Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- EQ VASBaseline, Week 24The EQ-5D-5L was a standardized instrument used to evaluate patients' overall health-related quality of life (QoL). It consisted of two components: the descriptive system and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). The EQ VAS captured the respondent's self-rated health on a vertical scale ranging from 0 (worst imaginable health) to 100 (best imaginable health). Changes in EQ VAS scores from baseline to Week 24 were analyzed, with positive changes indicating improvement in health-related quality of life.

Countries

Germany

Contacts

STUDY_DIRECTORNovartis Pharmaceuticals

Novartis Pharmaceuticals

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Patients were randomized in 19 study sites across Germany

Pre-assignment details

A total of 100 participants were screened and 62 participants were randomized in nearly equal numbers to the 2 treatment groups (secukinumab: N=30; placebo: N=32) and received study treatment

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Secukinumab
Participants received 300 mg of secukinumab s.c. for 12 weeks
30
Placebo
Participants received placebo s.c. for 12 weeks
32
Total62

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicSecukinumabPlaceboTotal
Age, Continuous52.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.5
52.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9
52.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.2
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black
1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Caucasian
29 Participants31 Participants60 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
20 Participants15 Participants35 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
10 Participants17 Participants27 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 300 / 32
other
Total, other adverse events
22 / 3024 / 32
serious
Total, serious adverse events
2 / 303 / 32

Outcome results

Primary

Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Percentage Score at Week 24

The WORC Index consisted of 21 items divided into 5 Domains: Physical Symptoms (6 items), Sport/Recreation (4 items), Work Function (4 items), Lifestyle Function (4 items) and Emotional Function (3 items). Each of the 21 items in the WORC was rated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (no impact on quality of life) to 100 (worst possible impact). Thus, the total score ranged from 0 to 2100 points. The score was reported as a percentage of normal by subtracting the total score from 2100, dividing by 2100, and multiplying by 100. Total final WORC percentage scores ranged from 0%, the lowest functional status level, to 100%, the highest functional status level. Change from baseline in the WORC percentage total score was assessed at Week 24. A positive change from baseline indicated an improvement.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Percentage Score at Week 2455.7 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 28.1
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Percentage Score at Week 2446.8 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 26.9
Secondary

Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- EQ VAS

The EQ-5D-5L was a standardized instrument used to evaluate patients' overall health-related quality of life (QoL). It consisted of two components: the descriptive system and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). The EQ VAS captured the respondent's self-rated health on a vertical scale ranging from 0 (worst imaginable health) to 100 (best imaginable health). Changes in EQ VAS scores from baseline to Week 24 were analyzed, with positive changes indicating improvement in health-related quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- EQ VAS18.3 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 36.5
PlaceboChange From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- EQ VAS23.8 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 27.3
Secondary

Change From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- Total Score

The EQ-5D-5L was a standardized instrument used to evaluate patients' overall health-related quality of life (QoL). It consisted of two components: the descriptive system and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). The descriptive system assessed five dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension was rated on five levels, from 1 (no problems) to 5 (extreme problems). These ratings were combined to generate a composite health index, which could be converted into a single summary health utility score using published value sets. Total scores ranged from 0 to 1, with lower scores indicating greater health impairment. Changes in total scores from baseline to Week 24 were analyzed, with positive changes indicating improvement in health-related quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- Total Score0.265 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 0.226
PlaceboChange From Baseline in EuroQol 5 Dimensions- 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) at Week 24- Total Score0.342 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 0.228
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity Score at Week 24

The participant's global assessment of disease activity was performed using 100 mm VAS ranging from 0=no activity to 100= most active, after the question Please indicate with a vertical mark ( \| ) through the horizontal line the global activity of your disease in the last 24 hours. Change from baseline in the participant's global assessment of disease activity score was assessed at Week 24. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity Score at Week 24-46.4 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 36.6
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Participant's Global Assessment of Disease Activity Score at Week 24-18.5 Score on a scaleStandard Deviation 37.2
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire Score at Week 24

The QuickDASH was an abbreviated form of the DASH. The QuickDASH Index was self-administered and used 11 items to measure physical function and symptoms in participants with any or multiple musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb. It had a recall period of 1 week. Each item of the QuickDASH had five response options. The raw score was calculated as the sum of responses, converted to an average, and rescaled to a total score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 100 (most severe disability) Change from baseline to Week 24 was assessed. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire Score at Week 24-34.1 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 23.7
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire Score at Week 24-33.5 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 24.6
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24

The SF-36 Health Survey was a validated questionnaire assessing health-related quality of life. Participants completed the survey throughout the study, reflecting their health status over the previous 4 weeks. It consisted of eight subscales that were scored individually; and two overall summary scores, the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS). Component summary scores (PCS and MCS) were derived from weighted combinations of the eight subscales. Each domain and component summary score ranged from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. Change from baseline to Week 24 in all subscale and summary scores was assessed, where a positive change indicated improvement.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Physical component summary9.4 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 9.1
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Mental component summary8.0 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.7
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24General health3.0 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 8.5
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Vitality8.3 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 9.9
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Social functioning8.3 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.1
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Role emotional11.5 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 13.1
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Mental health7.6 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Physical function8.8 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 9.5
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Role-physical9.9 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.3
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Bodily pain16.2 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.2
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Physical function8.6 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 6.4
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Physical component summary9.7 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 7.9
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Role emotional5.8 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 14.5
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Mental component summary6.3 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 11.9
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Bodily pain15.1 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 9.2
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24General health3.9 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.6
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Mental health9.1 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.9
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Vitality7.7 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 11
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Role-physical9.3 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.9
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) Score at Week 24Social functioning8.2 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 10.9
Secondary

Change From Baseline in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Pain Score at Week 24

The score for pain was assessed by using an 11-point NRS ranging from 0 no pain at all to 10 worst possible pain, after the question On a numeric scale of 0-10 where would you rate your pain at this time. Change from baseline to Wek 24 was assessed. A negative change from baseline indicated improvement

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Pain Score at Week 24-4.5 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 2.8
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Pain Score at Week 24-4.6 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 2.4
Secondary

Change From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24

The WORC Index consisted of 21 items divided into 5 Domains: Physical Symptoms (6 items), Sport/Recreation (4 items), Work Function (4 items), Lifestyle Function (4 items) and Emotional Function (3 items). Each of the 21 items in the WORC was rated using a VAS ranging from 0 (no impact on quality of life) to 100 (worst possible impact). Each subdomain score was calculated as a percentage of normal function, ranging from 0% (worst condition) to 100% (best condition). Change from baseline in the WORC Index percentage sub-domain score was assessed at Week 24. A positive change from baseline indicated an improvement

Time frame: Baseline, Week 24

Population: FAS: all patients to whom study/reference treatment was assigned by randomization.~Only participants with both a baseline and a Week 24 assessment were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Sports and recreation51.8 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 30.9
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Lifestyle59.5 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 27.3
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Work59.7 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 32
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Emotional function64.2 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 23.6
SecukinumabChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Physical symptom score48.8 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 31.2
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Emotional function54.3 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 31.5
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Physical symptom score40.0 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 25
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Sports and recreation44.0 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 30.6
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Work49.9 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 30.5
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the WORC Percentage Sub-scores at Week 24Lifestyle52.9 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 26.4

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