Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00662558

A Six Week Study Of The Pain Relieving Effects Of Celecoxib 200 Mg Twice Daily Compared To Tramadol 50 Mg Four Times Daily In Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

To compare the analgesic effectiveness of celecoxib and tramadol in subjects with Chronic Low Back Pain measured by the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-Pain) at Week 6

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 3

Primary location

Pfizer Investigational Site, Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Loading trial locations.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • The subject presents with duration of chronic low back pain of > 3 months requiring regular use of analgesics (> 4 days/week), except for acetaminophen which cannot have been the sole analgesic used

Exclusion criteria

  • The subject has chronic low back pain, which is neurologic in etiology (i.e., radiculopathy, neuropathy, myelopathy)

Treatment and study plan

Celecoxib

Drug

200 mg capsules BID for 6 weeks

Tramadol HCl

Drug

50 mg capsules QID for 6 weeks

Primary outcomes

  1. Treatment Responders Based on the Numerical Rating Scale-Pain (NRS-Pain)

    Time frame: Week 6 or Early Termination (ET)

    A subject who met the following criteria was considered as a successful responder at Week 6: completed 6 weeks of treatment with study medication and had a 30% improvement from Baseline to Week 6/ET on the NRS-Pain. NRS-Pain scale assessed the severity of a subject's lower back pain on a scale of 0 (No pain) and 10 (Worst possible pain).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change From Baseline in Severity of Chronic Low Back Pain as Measured by NRS-Pain

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET

    NRS-Pain scale assessed the severity of a subject's lower back pain on a scale of 0 (No pain) and 10 (Worst possible pain). NRS-Pain scale: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.

  2. Change From Baseline in Severity of Low Back Pain as Measured by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET

    VAS was a 100 millimeter (mm) scale that subjects used to assess the severity of their lower back pain. Based on the following question, "During the past day, how much back pain did you have?", the subject was instructed to place a vertical line on the VAS to indicate the magnitude of his/her lower back pain. 0 mm = no pain and 100 mm = worst possible pain. VAS: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.

  3. Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity

    Time frame: Week 6/ET

    Number of subjects with a graded level of disease activity using the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity 5-point scale (1=very good, 2=good, 3=fair, 4=poor, and 5=very poor). Subjects were classified as "Improved" if their assessment reduced at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 1 (Very Good). Subjects were classified as "Worsened" if their assessment increased at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 5 (Very Poor). Subjects were classified as "No Change" otherwise.

  4. Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity

    Time frame: Week 6/ET

    Number of subjects with a physician's grading of disease activity using the Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity 5-point scale ((1=very good, 2=good, 3=fair, 4=poor, and 5=very poor). Subjects were classified as "Improved" if their assessment reduced at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 1 (Very Good). Subjects were classified as "Worsened" if their assessment increased at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 5 (Very Poor). Subjects were classified as "No Change" otherwise.

  5. Change From Baseline in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET

    Each subject assessed his/her own disability due to low back pain using the RMDQ worksheet, which consisted of 24 statements of disability. The RMDQ total score was calculated as the total number of statements that were checked; the RMDQ total scores could have ranged from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater disability. RMDQ: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.

  6. Change From Baseline in Modified Brief Pain Inventory (m-BPI-sf)

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET

    m-BPI-sf scale assessed pain severity (0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain), and pain interference of functional activities (0 = does not interfere to 10 = completely interferes) during the 24 hour follow-up period. Subjects indicated: how much pain now; worst pain; average level of pain; how much pain interfered with general activity, mood, walking ability, relations with other people, sleep, normal work (including housework), and enjoyment of life. m-BPI-sf: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.

  7. Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Scale

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET

    MOS sleep scale included the following attributes: sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken shortness of breath or headache, quantity of sleep, sleep adequacy, somnolence, Sleep Problem Index I, and Sleep Problem Index II. Score ranged from 0-100, with a higher score indicating more of the scale attribute (e.g., more sleep disturbance, etc.). A negative change indicated subject improvement. MOS sleep scale: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.

  8. Number of Subjects With Change From Baseline in MOS Optimal Sleep Scale Scores

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET

    The Optimal Scale is scaled from 0 or 1 with 1 indicating 7 or 8 hours of sleep per night and 0 otherwise. Number of subjects with change of improvement (0 to 1), no change (1 to 1 or 0 to 0), or worsening (1 to 0) from baseline as indicated by the MOS Optimal sleep scale.

  9. Change From Baseline in Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ)

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET

    The WLQ included the following: Time Scale, Physical Scale, Output Scale, Mental-Interpersonal Scale, and Index Scale. The scales ranged from 0 (Limited none of the time) to 100 (Limited all of the time). A negative change indicated subject improvement.

  10. Patient's Global Evaluation of Study Medication

    Time frame: Weeks 1, 3, and 6/ET

    Number of subjects with an overall response to study medication of poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent.

  11. Patient's Satisfaction Questionnaire (With Pain Relief Scale)

    Time frame: Week 6/ET

    Number of subjects at varying levels of pain relief (1 = very dissatisfied to 10 = very satisfied).

  12. Patient's Satisfaction Questionnaire (With Walking and Bending Ability Scale)

    Time frame: Week 6/ET

    Number of subjects at varying levels of pain relief (1 = very dissatisfied to 10 = very satisfied).

  13. Chronic Low Back Pain Responders Based on VAS, Patient's Global, and RMDQ

    Time frame: Week 6/ET

    Subjects were successful responders if they had: > = 30% improvement from baseline to final visit in VAS assessment (as identified by 100 millimeter scale); > = 30% improvement from baseline to final visit in Patient's Global assessment (classified as improved if assessment reduced at least 2 grades from baseline or if assessment changed to Grade 1, worsened if assessment increased at least 2 grades from baseline or if assessment changed to Grade 5, or no change; and < 20% worsening from baseline to final visit in RMDQ assessment (lower scores indicated greater disability).

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Pfizer's Upjohn has merged with Mylan to form Viatris Inc.

Industry

Registry information

Official study title

A Six Week Double-Blind, Randomized, Multicenter Comparison Study Of The Analgesic Effectiveness Of Celecoxib 200 Mg BID Compared To Tramadol Hydrochloride 50 Mg QID In Subjects With Chronic Low Back Pain

Important dates

Study start
2008
Primary completion
2008
Study completion
2008
First posted
Apr 21, 2008
Registry last updated
Feb 21, 2021

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.