Oral Budesonide Suspension (OBS)
DrugOral Budesonide Suspension (OBS) 10 milliliter (ml) of 0.2 milligram per milliliter (mg/ml) twice daily up to 16 weeks.
NCT Number: NCT02605837
A study in adolescents and adults with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) to measure the histologic response and determine if any reduction in dysphagia is achieved.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me11 year–55 year
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 3
Children's Hospital, Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Oral Budesonide Suspension (OBS) 10 milliliter (ml) of 0.2 milligram per milliliter (mg/ml) twice daily up to 16 weeks.
Oral dose of 10 ml of placebo matched with the experimental drug.
Time frame: Week 16
Histologic response was defined as a peak eosinophil count of less than or equal to (<=) 6/ high-powered field (HPF) across all available esophageal levels at final treatment period evaluation (Week 16). Histologic response after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 was reported.
Time frame: Week 16
Dysphagia symptom response was defined as greater than or equal to (>=) 30 percent (%) reduction in the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) combined score (questions 2+3). DSQ contained 4 questions, all participants used a diary, and responded to Questions 1 (did you eat solid food) and 2 (did food pass slowly or get stuck). If the participant's answer to Question 2 was 'No', the diary ended for that day. If a participant answered 'Yes', he/she advanced to Questions 3 (did you have to do anything to make the food go down or get relief) and 4 (extent to which the participant experienced pain while swallowing). DSQ score= ([sum of points from questions 2+3 in the daily DSQ]×14)/ Number of diaries reported with non-missing data. Dysphagia symptom response after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 was reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
DSQ contained 4 questions, all participants used a diary, and responded to Questions 1 (did you eat solid food) and 2 (did food pass slowly or get stuck). If the participant's answer to Question 2 was 'No', the diary ended for that day. If a participant answered 'Yes', he/she advanced to Questions 3 (did you have to do anything to make the food go down or get relief) and 4 (extent to which the participant experienced pain while swallowing). DSQ combined score= ([sum of points from questions 2+3 in the daily DSQ]×14)/ Number of diaries reported with non-missing data. Scale range was 0 - 2 for question 2 and 0 - 4 for question 3, with higher values representing a worse outcome. Scale range for DSQ combined score was 0 - 84, with higher values representing a worse outcome. A negative change from baseline indicates that symptoms decreased. Change from baseline in DSQ after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 was reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Endoscopic findings with separate evaluations of the proximal and distal esophagus were recorded with respect to 5 categories: 1) exudates or plaques (grade 0-2); 2) fixed esophageal rings (grade 0-3); 3) edema (grade 0-2); 4) furrows (grade 0-2); and 5) strictures (grade 0-1). An endoscopy score for each category was calculated and summed for each anatomic location (proximal and distal). The minimum and maximum endoscopy score was 0 and 10 points respectively for each location (proximal and distal) and the total endoscopy score was the sum of the scores for the proximal and distal locations (maximum total score of 20 points respectively). The higher score indicated worse appearance. A negative change from baseline indicates that appearance improved. Endoscopic findings after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 were reported.
Time frame: Week 16
Participant was considered as responder at Week 16 if he/she had peak eosinophil count of <15/HPF or <=1/HPF across all esophagus levels. Number of participants with peak eosinophil count < 15/HPF or <=1/HPF after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 were reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Change from baseline in the peak eosinophil count after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at week 16 for each available esophageal level (proximal, mid, distal, maximum) were reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Change from baseline in histopathologic epithelial features combined total score of grade and stage ratio after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 were reported by measuring eight histopathologic epithelial features: basal layer hyperplasia, eosinophil density, eosinophil micro-abscesses, eosinophil surface layering, dilated intercellular spaces, surface epithelial alteration, dyskeratotic epithelial cells, lamina propria fibrosis were scored on a 4-point scale (0=normal, 3=worst) for both the severity of the abnormality (grade) and the amount of tissue affected by the abnormality (stage). Thus each of the 3 levels had a minimum score of 0 and maximum possible score of 24, and a possible total grade or stage score of 72 for a maximum combined score of 144. Combined total score ratio (TSR) =(proximal TSR + mid TSR + distal TSR)/N, where N is the number of non missing sections for TSR. A negative change from baseline indicates that epithelial inflammation decreased.
Time frame: Week 16
Dysphagia symptom response (binary response [i.e, responders versus. non-responders]) was defined as a >=50% reduction in the DSQ combined score (questions 2+3), from baseline to the final treatment period evaluation (Week 16). DSQ contained 4 questions, all participants used a diary, and responded to Questions 1 (did you eat solid food) and 2 (did food pass slowly or get stuck). If the participant's answer to Question 2 was 'No', the diary ended for that day. If a participant answered 'Yes', he/she advanced to Questions 3 (did you have to do anything to make the food go down or get relief) and 4 (extent to which the participant experienced pain while swallowing). DSQ score= ([sum of points from questions 2+3 in the daily DSQ]×14)/ Number of diaries reported with non-missing data. Number of participants with binary response after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 were reported.
Time frame: Week 16
Overall binary response I was defined as a reduction in the DSQ score of >=30% from baseline to the final treatment period (week 16) evaluation and a peak eosinophil count of <=6/HPF across all esophageal levels at the final treatment period evaluation. Participant was considered as responder at Week 16 if he/she achieved a minimum of 30% reduction in DSQ combined score between baseline and Week 16 and has peak eosinophil count of <=6/HPF across all esophagus levels. Number of participants with overall binary response I after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 were reported.
Time frame: Week 16
Overall binary response II was defined as a reduction in the DSQ score of >=50% from baseline to the final treatment period evaluation and a peak eosinophil count of <=6/HPF across all esophageal levels at the final treatment period evaluation. Participant was considered as responder at Week 16 if he/she achieved a minimum of 50% reduction in DSQ combined score between baseline and Week 16 and had peak eosinophil count of <=6/HPF across all esophagus levels. Number of participants with overall binary response II after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 were reported.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
DSQ contained 4 questions, all participants used a diary, and responded to Questions 1 (did you eat solid food) and 2 (did food pass slowly or get stuck). If the participant's answer to Question 2 was 'No', the diary ended for that day. If a participant answered 'Yes', he/she advanced to Questions 3 (did you have to do anything to make the food go down or get relief) and 4 (extent to which the participant experienced pain while swallowing). DSQ + pain score was calculated by summing the scores of responses to questions 2, 3, and 4 by using following formula: DSQ + pain score= ([sum of points from questions 2+3+4 in the daily DSQ] ×14)/ Number of diaries reported with non-missing data. Scale range was 0 - 2 for question 2, 0 - 4 for question 3 and 0 - 4 for question 4, with higher values representing a worse outcome. Scale range for DSQ + pain score was 0 - 140, with higher values representing a worse outcome. A negative change from baseline indicates that symptoms decreased.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
DSQ pain score was calculated by summing the scores of responses to Question 4 (extent to which the participant experienced pain while swallowing) only, by using the following formula: DSQ pain score= [(sum of points from question 4 in the daily DSQ)×14]/ Number of diaries reported with non-missing data. Scale range was 0 - 4 for question 4, with higher values representing a worse outcome. Scale range for DSQ pain score was 0 - 56, with higher values representing a worse outcome. A negative change from baseline indicates that symptoms decreased. Change from baseline in DSQ pain score (question 4) after 12 weeks of double blind treatment at Week 16 were reported.
Time frame: From start of study drug administration up to follow-up (Week 20)
An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical investigation participant administered a pharmaceutical product and that does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment. TEAEs were defined as AEs that start or deteriorate on or after the first dose of double-blind IP (Week 44) and through the safety follow-up contact, or 31 days after the last dose of IP for participants who did not have a safety follow-up contact. Number of participants with TEAE's were reported.
Time frame: Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose on Week 8, 12 and 16
Area under the curve for the defined interval between doses (12 hours), calculated using the linear-up/log-down trapezoidal rule.The AUCtau of plasma budesonide was reported. Hours times pico grams per milliliter was abbreviated as h.pg/mL.
Time frame: Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose on Week 8, 12 and 16
The Cmax of budesonide in plasma was reported.
Time frame: Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose on Week 8, 12 and 16
Tmax of budesonide in plasma was reported.
Time frame: Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose on Week 8, 12 and 16
Lambda Z of budesonide in plasma was reported.
Time frame: Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose on Week 8, 12 and 16
t1/2 of budesonide in plasma was reported
Time frame: Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose on Week 8, 12 and 16
CL/F of budesonide in plasma was reported.
Time frame: Pre-dose, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours post-dose on Week 8, 12 and 16
Vz/F of budesonide in plasma was reported.
Shire
Industry
Oral Budesonide Suspension (OBS) in Adolescent and Adult Subjects (11 to 55 Years of Age, Inclusive) With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Phase 3 Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study
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.
NCT07102329
Barrett Esophagus, Deglutition Disorders
Milan, Lombardy, Italy
View Trial DetailsNCT04394351
Digestive System Diseases, Eosinophilia
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04626609
Digestive System Diseases, Eosinophilia
Graz, Austria
View Trial DetailsNCT02736409
Digestive System Diseases, Eosinophilia
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
View Trial Details