Skip to content
← Full study record

NCT02609828 · OUTCOME

Change From Baseline in the Weekly Average Pain Intensity NRS Score in Non-Index Cancer Pain Sites at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24

Phase 3 Study on the Efficacy and Safety of Tanezumab in Patients With Cancer Pain Due to Bone Metastasis Who Are Taking Background Opioid Therapy · Source last updated 2023-02-16

Results reported by the registry submitting party. Population, time horizon, units and missing values must be read together.

Measure
LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN
Unit
Units on a scale
Interval / dispersion
Standard Error
Time frame
Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24

What was measured

Weekly average pain intensity in the non-index cancer pain site was assessed by participants on an 11 point pain intensity NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores signified more severity of pain. Non-index cancer pan sites were the most painful cancer pain sites other than the index bone metastasis cancer pain site. The participants described their weekly pain at the painful site by choosing the appropriate number from 0 to 10 on IRT diaries. Baseline weekly average pain intensity was weekly average pain intensity NRS score recorded on any day during the baseline assessment period. Five days prior to dosing was considered as baseline assessment period. The Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 weekly average pain intensity value was the weekly average pain intensity NRS scores recorded on any day from the span of 7 days prior to specified week.

Analysis population: The mITT analysis set: participants randomized to tanezumab 20 mg or placebo SC, received at least 1dose of SC study medication. Multiple imputation method was applied. As planned summarized efficacy data for tanezumab 10 mg and 10/20 mg arms not reported; for these 2 arms individual values are reported. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies participants evaluable for this outcome measure and ''number analyzed'' signifies participants evaluable at specified time points.

Groups in this outcome

Placebo

Participants received placebo matched to tanezumab SC once every 8 weeks for 24 weeks.

Tanezumab 10 mg

Participants in this discontinued treatment arm, received tanezumab 10 mg SC once every 8 weeks before protocol amendment 3 and completed their treatment before the amendment.

Tanezumab 10/20 mg

Participants in this treatment group had received tanezumab 10 mg SC once every 8 weeks before protocol amendment 3 and after the amendment they continued remaining treatment with tanezumab 20 mg SC once every 8 weeks.

Tanezumab 20 mg

Participants received tanezumab 20 mg SC once every 8 weeks for 24 weeks.

Group identifiers and denominators belong to this outcome only. They may differ in another outcome or in safety reporting.

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg2
Tanezumab 10/20 mg1
Tanezumab 20 mg32

Reported measurements

Change at Week 1

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg1
Tanezumab 10/20 mg1
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-0.640.42Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 1.
Tanezumab 10/20 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.
Tanezumab 20 mg-1.140.35Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Change at Week 2

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg1
Tanezumab 10/20 mg1
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-0.960.54Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.5
Tanezumab 10/20 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 1.5
Tanezumab 20 mg-1.810.47Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Change at Week 4

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg2
Tanezumab 10/20 mg1
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-1.420.59Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value were -1 and 0.
Tanezumab 10/20 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.5
Tanezumab 20 mg-2.220.52Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Change at Week 6

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg2
Tanezumab 10/20 mg1
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-1.760.65Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value were -1 and -3.
Tanezumab 10/20 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.
Tanezumab 20 mg-2.240.56Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Change at Week 8

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg2
Tanezumab 10/20 mg1
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-1.790.70Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2 and -3.
Tanezumab 10/20 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was -2.
Tanezumab 20 mg-2.340.62Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Change at Week 12

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg2
Tanezumab 10/20 mg1
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-1.640.59Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2 and -1.375.
Tanezumab 10/20 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values was -1.
Tanezumab 20 mg-2.140.53Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Change at Week 16

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg2
Tanezumab 10/20 mg0
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-1.060.71Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2 and -1.375.
Tanezumab 20 mg-2.270.60Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Change at Week 24

Analysis denominator · Participants

GroupSource count
Placebo23
Tanezumab 10 mg1
Tanezumab 10/20 mg0
Tanezumab 20 mg32
Values in Units on a scale · Interval/dispersion: Standard Error
GroupValueSpreadLowerUpperComment
Placebo-0.870.68Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Tanezumab 10 mgNANANot reportedNot reportedData for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2.
Tanezumab 20 mg-1.920.59Not reportedNot reportedNot reported

Source statistical analyses

Group order, estimate direction, methods and comments are retained. No treatment ranking is inferred.

  1. ci Lower Limit
    -1.47
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.47
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.48
    group Description
    Change at Week 1: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.3003
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.50
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  2. ci Lower Limit
    -2.03
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.35
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.59
    group Description
    Change at Week 2: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.1603
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.84
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  3. ci Lower Limit
    -2.13
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.53
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.66
    group Description
    Change at Week 4: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.2298
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.80
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  4. ci Lower Limit
    -1.93
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.97
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.72
    group Description
    Change at Week 6: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.5054
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.48
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  5. ci Lower Limit
    -2.10
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    1.01
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    -0.77
    group Description
    Change at Week 8: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.4793
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.55
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  6. ci Lower Limit
    -1.83
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.83
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.66
    group Description
    Change at Week 12: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.4496
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.50
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  7. ci Lower Limit
    -2.77
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.36
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.77
    group Description
    Change at Week 16: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.1263
    param Type
    Difference in least square LS mean
    param Value
    -1.21
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  8. ci Lower Limit
    -2.54
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.44
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.73
    group Description
    Change at Week 24: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.1620
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -1.05
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
Complete source fields
analyses
  1. ci Lower Limit
    -1.47
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.47
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.48
    group Description
    Change at Week 1: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.3003
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.50
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  2. ci Lower Limit
    -2.03
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.35
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.59
    group Description
    Change at Week 2: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.1603
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.84
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  3. ci Lower Limit
    -2.13
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.53
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.66
    group Description
    Change at Week 4: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.2298
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.80
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  4. ci Lower Limit
    -1.93
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.97
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.72
    group Description
    Change at Week 6: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.5054
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.48
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  5. ci Lower Limit
    -2.10
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    1.01
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    -0.77
    group Description
    Change at Week 8: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.4793
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.55
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  6. ci Lower Limit
    -1.83
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.83
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.66
    group Description
    Change at Week 12: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.4496
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -0.50
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  7. ci Lower Limit
    -2.77
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.36
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.77
    group Description
    Change at Week 16: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.1263
    param Type
    Difference in least square LS mean
    param Value
    -1.21
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
  8. ci Lower Limit
    -2.54
    ci Num Sides
    TWO_SIDED
    ci Pct Value
    95
    ci Upper Limit
    0.44
    dispersion Type
    STANDARD_ERROR_OF_MEAN
    dispersion Value
    0.73
    group Description
    Change at Week 24: ANCOVA model for imputed datasets included treatment, region, and randomization stratification variables (concomitant anticancer treatment and tumor aggressiveness) as fixed effects, and baseline average pain intensity at the index bone metastasis cancer pain site and baseline opioid dose as covariates.
    group Ids
    1. OG000
    2. OG003
    non Inferiority Type
    SUPERIORITY
    p Value
    0.1620
    param Type
    Difference in LS mean
    param Value
    -1.05
    statistical Method
    ANCOVA
classes
  1. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.42
        value
        -0.64
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 1.
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.
        group Id
        OG002
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      4. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.35
        value
        -1.14
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        1
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        1
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 1
  2. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.54
        value
        -0.96
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.5
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 1.5
        group Id
        OG002
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      4. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.47
        value
        -1.81
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        1
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        1
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 2
  3. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.59
        value
        -1.42
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value were -1 and 0.
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.5
        group Id
        OG002
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      4. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.52
        value
        -2.22
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        2
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        1
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 4
  4. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.65
        value
        -1.76
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value were -1 and -3.
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was 0.
        group Id
        OG002
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      4. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.56
        value
        -2.24
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        2
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        1
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 6
  5. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.70
        value
        -1.79
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2 and -3.
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual value was -2.
        group Id
        OG002
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      4. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.62
        value
        -2.34
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        2
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        1
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 8
  6. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.59
        value
        -1.64
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2 and -1.375.
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values was -1.
        group Id
        OG002
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      4. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.53
        value
        -2.14
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        2
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        1
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 12
  7. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.71
        value
        -1.06
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2 and -1.375.
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.60
        value
        -2.27
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        2
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        0
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 16
  8. categories
    1. measurements
      1. group Id
        OG000
        spread
        0.68
        value
        -0.87
      2. comment
        Data for this arm was not summarized per plan. Hence, not reported as LS mean and SE. Individual values were -2.
        group Id
        OG001
        spread
        NA
        value
        NA
      3. group Id
        OG003
        spread
        0.59
        value
        -1.92
    denoms
    1. counts
      1. group Id
        OG000
        value
        23
      2. group Id
        OG001
        value
        1
      3. group Id
        OG002
        value
        0
      4. group Id
        OG003
        value
        32
      units
      Participants
    title
    Change at Week 24
denoms
  1. counts
    1. group Id
      OG000
      value
      23
    2. group Id
      OG001
      value
      2
    3. group Id
      OG002
      value
      1
    4. group Id
      OG003
      value
      32
    units
    Participants
description
Weekly average pain intensity in the non-index cancer pain site was assessed by participants on an 11 point pain intensity NRS ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores signified more severity of pain. Non-index cancer pan sites were the most painful cancer pain sites other than the index bone metastasis cancer pain site. The participants described their weekly pain at the painful site by choosing the appropriate number from 0 to 10 on IRT diaries. Baseline weekly average pain intensity was weekly average pain intensity NRS score recorded on any day during the baseline assessment period. Five days prior to dosing was considered as baseline assessment period. The Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24 weekly average pain intensity value was the weekly average pain intensity NRS scores recorded on any day from the span of 7 days prior to specified week.
dispersion Type
Standard Error
groups
  1. description
    Participants received placebo matched to tanezumab SC once every 8 weeks for 24 weeks.
    id
    OG000
    title
    Placebo
  2. description
    Participants in this discontinued treatment arm, received tanezumab 10 mg SC once every 8 weeks before protocol amendment 3 and completed their treatment before the amendment.
    id
    OG001
    title
    Tanezumab 10 mg
  3. description
    Participants in this treatment group had received tanezumab 10 mg SC once every 8 weeks before protocol amendment 3 and after the amendment they continued remaining treatment with tanezumab 20 mg SC once every 8 weeks.
    id
    OG002
    title
    Tanezumab 10/20 mg
  4. description
    Participants received tanezumab 20 mg SC once every 8 weeks for 24 weeks.
    id
    OG003
    title
    Tanezumab 20 mg
param Type
LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN
population Description
The mITT analysis set: participants randomized to tanezumab 20 mg or placebo SC, received at least 1dose of SC study medication. Multiple imputation method was applied. As planned summarized efficacy data for tanezumab 10 mg and 10/20 mg arms not reported; for these 2 arms individual values are reported. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies participants evaluable for this outcome measure and ''number analyzed'' signifies participants evaluable at specified time points.
reporting Status
POSTED
time Frame
Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24
title
Change From Baseline in the Weekly Average Pain Intensity NRS Score in Non-Index Cancer Pain Sites at Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16 and 24
type
SECONDARY
unit Of Measure
Units on a scale

Download exact source JSON → · Snapshot ctgov-results-25a395029948b04d52b1253f

Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice