Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00768053

Evaluation of EULAR-RAID Score in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

The Disease Activity Score (DAS) is a system of measurement developed in the 1980s that uses certain criteria, including joint counts and patient perceived disease activity, to measure disease activity in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis . More recently, the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) has developed a new system of measurement known as the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease score, or EULAR-RAID score. The EULAR-RAID score is a composite score based on patient reported outcomes, and includes such criteria as pain, functional disability, fatigue, sleep disturbances, coping, overall assessment of physical well being and overall assessment of psychological well being. The objective of this study is to evaluate the practical modalities and performance of the EULAR- RAID score in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have been prescribed etanercept as part of usual medical practice.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Rheumatoid Arthritis Arthritis Arthritis, Rheumatoid Autoimmune Diseases Connective Tissue Diseases Immune System Diseases Joint Diseases Musculoskeletal Diseases Rheumatic Diseases Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 4

Primary location

Pfizer Investigational Site, Amiens, France

Loading trial locations.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Patient aged up to or equal 18 years
  • Meet the 1987 ACR Revised Criteria for Rheumatoid Arthritis.
  • Active rheumatoid arthritis with a DAS greater than 3,2 and one of the two followings : Objective evidence of 4 clinical synovitis or CRP (plasma C-reactive protein) greater than 10 mg/l or ESR (erythrocyte sedimentation rate) greater than 28 mm/h
  • Failure of MTX, taken for at least 3 months and at least 15 mg/wk or maximal tolerated dosage . In patients with contraindications or intolerance to MTX, failure of another drug with structural efficacy (leflunomide or sulfasalazine), taken for at least 3 months at the optimal tolerated dosage Concomitant treatment for RA : DMARDs, corticosteroids, NSAIDs and analgesics are permitted. DMARDs and corticosteroids should be stable between screening and baseline visits.
  • Functional status Class I, II or III as defined by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Revised Criteria.
  • Negative serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (beta-HCG) pregnancy test at screening for all women of childbearing potential. Sexually active women of childbearing potential must use a medically acceptable form of contraception. Medically acceptable forms of contraception include oral contraceptives, injectable or implantable methods, intrauterine devices, or properly used barrier contraception. Sexually active men must agree to use a medically accepted form of contraception during the study.
  • Able and willing to self-inject ETN or have a designee who can do so.
  • Able to store injectable test article at 2 Celcius degree to 8 Celcius degree

Exclusion criteria

  • Prior experience of biologic treatment for their RA including ETN.
  • Sepsis or risk of sepsis.
  • Current or recent infections, including chronic or localized.
  • Planned orthopedic surgery within 3 months (for RA disease)
  • History of orthopedic surgery 1 month before screening
  • Latex sensitivity.
  • Vaccination with live vaccine in the last 4 weeks, or expected to require such vaccination during the course of the study.
  • Previous clinical trial involvement in the last 3 months.
  • Patients with the following conditions or risk factors should only be entered into the study if the investigator has conducted and documented a full risk/benefit evaluation
  • History of recurring or chronic infection, or underlying condition which may predispose patients to infections e.g. tuberculosis (TB) infection (Note: follow SmPC and French guidelines for appropriate screening and treatment of TB in the setting of anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy. Patients with latent TB (contact with TB patients, history of primary TB, intradermal test with 5 IU of tuberculin greater than 5 mm, or radiographic lung density greater than 1 cm and consistent with TB) should receive appropriate prophylactic therapy as recommended by the French Agency for healthcare Product Safety (AFSSAPS, http//afassaps.sante.fr/), serious infection (infection associated with hospitalization and/or intravenous antibiotics) within 1 month of test article administration or active infection at screening, open cutaneous ulcers, known human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), or hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive.
  • Current or prior history of blood dyscrasias. Abnormal safety baseline blood test e.g. hemoglobin <= 85 g/L; hematocrit less than 27 %; platelet count less than 125 x 109/L; white blood cell count less than 3.5 x 109/L; serum creatinine greater than 175 µmol/L; aspartate aminotransferase (AST [SGOT]) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT [SGPT]) greater than 2 times the laboratory's upper limit of normal.
  • Pre-existing or recent onset central nervous system (CNS) demyelinating disease.
  • Cardiovascular conditions, e.g., myocardial infarction within 12 months of the screening visit, unstable angina pectoris, class III or IV congestive heart failure as defined by the New York Heart Association classification or decompensated congestive heart failure.
  • Uncontrolled conditions, e.g., diabetes mellitus, hypertension (defined as screening systolic blood pressure greater than 160 mm Hg or screening diastolic blood pressure greater than 100 mm Hg), severe pulmonary disease requiring hospitalization or supplemental oxygen.
  • At increased risk of malignancy.
  • Reasonable expectation that the subject will not be able to satisfactorily complete the study.
  • History of or current psychiatric illness, alcohol or drug abuse that would interfere with the subject's ability to comply with protocol requirements or give informed consent.
  • Employment by the investigator or reporting directly or indirectly to the investigator.

Treatment and study plan

etanercept

Drug

Etanercept 50 mg once a week

Primary outcomes

  1. Reliability of the European League Against Rheumatism - Rheumatism Arthritis Impact of Disease (EULAR-RAID) Score

    Time frame: Screening, baseline

    EULAR-RAID score reliability assessed using an intraclass correlation coefficient (using a consistency definition where the between-measure variance is excluded from the denominator variance and its 95% confidence interval) and the standard error of measurement (SEM) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). A higher intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) indicates greater score reliability (0.0 to 0.10=virtually none; 0.11 to 0.40=slight; 0.41 to 0.60=fair; 0.61 to 0.80=moderate; 0.81 to 1.00=substantial).

  2. Simplicity: Time for Completion of the EULAR-RAID Questionnaire

    Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12

    EULAR-RAID is an assessment of patient reported outcomes for pain, functional disability, fatigue, sleep disturbance, coping, overall assessments of physical well-being and emotional well-being based on 7 numerical rating scales (NRS) questions. NRS individual questions with range of 0 (not affected, very good) to 10 (most affected) weighted and calculated with a total score range of 0 (not affected, very good) to 10 (most affected).

  3. Face Validity: Correlation Coefficients of the EULAR-RAID Score With the Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count (DAS28)

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 4

    DAS28 calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joints count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (millimeters per hour [mm/hour]) and patient's global assessment (PGA) of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity question measured on an 11-point rating scale scored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). Face validity assessed using a correlation coefficient between the EULAR-RAID score and the DAS28. A higher correlation coefficient indicates greater EULAR-RAID score validity.

  4. Face Validity: Correlation Coefficients of the EULAR-RAID Score With the Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count (DAS28): Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    DAS28 calculated from the number of swollen joints (SJC) and painful joints (PJC) using the 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity question measured on an 11-point rating scale scored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). Face validity assessed using a correlation coefficient between the EULAR-RAID score and the DAS28. A higher correlation coefficient indicates greater EULAR-RAID score validity.

  5. Face Validity: Correlation Coefficients of the EULAR-RAID Score With the Disease Activity Score Based on 28-joints Count (DAS28): Time-normalized Average

    Time frame: Baseline, Last observation up to Week 12

    Time-normalized average is the area under the curve (AUC) / time between first and last observations. DAS28 calculated from number of swollen joints and painful joints using 28 joints count, ESR (mm/hour) and patient's global assessment of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity question measured on an 11-point rating scale scored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). Face validity assessed using a correlation coefficient between the EULAR-RAID and DAS28 scores. A higher correlation coefficient indicates greater EULAR-RAID score validity.

  6. Face Validity: Correlation Coefficients of the EULAR-RAID Score With the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Health Status

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 4

    PGA of health status is a single-item participant rated response to the question "in general, how would you rate your health over the last 2 to 3 weeks"; scored 0 (very well) to 10 (extremely bad). Face validity assessed using a correlation coefficient between the EULAR-RAID score and the PGA. A higher correlation coefficient indicates greater EULAR-RAID score validity (best >0.85).

  7. Face Validity: Correlation Coefficients of the EULAR-RAID Score With the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Health Status: Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    PGA of health status is a single-item participant rated response to the question "in general, how would you rate your health over the last 2 to 3 weeks"; scored 0 (very well) to 10 (extremely bad). Face validity assessed using a correlation coefficient between the EULAR-RAID score and PGA health status score. A higher correlation coefficient indicates greater EULAR-RAID score validity (best >0.85).

  8. Face Validity: Correlation Coefficients of the EULAR-RAID Score With the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Health Status: Time-normalized Average

    Time frame: Baseline, Last observation up to Week 12

    Time-normalized average is the area under the curve (AUC) / time between first and last observations. PGA of health status is a single-item participant rated response to the question "in general, how would you rate your health over the last 2 to 3 weeks"; scored 0 (very well) to 10 (extremely bad). Face validity assessed using a correlation coefficient between the EULAR-RAID score and PGA health status score. A higher correlation coefficient indicates greater EULAR-RAID score validity (best >0.85).

  9. Sensitivity to Change of the EULAR-RAID Score: Change From Baseline to Week 4

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 4

    Sensitivity to change analyzed by testing if the difference of change from baseline of EULAR-RAID score minus the change from baseline of each component (pain, functional disability, fatigue, sleep disturbance, coping, overall physical and emotional well-being with score range 0 [not affected, very good] to 10 [most affected]) was different from 0 or not. Results expressed as standardized response mean (SRM) calculated as ratio of mean change over standard deviation of the change. A non significant test (p value ≥0.05) means the component had a significant influence to global EULAR RAID score.

  10. Sensitivity to Change of the EULAR-RAID Score: Change From Baseline to Week 12

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 12

    Sensitivity to change analyzed by testing if the difference of change from baseline of EULAR-RAID score minus the change from baseline of each component (pain, functional disability, fatigue, sleep disturbance, coping, overall physical and emotional well-being with score range 0 [not affected, very good] to 10 [most affected]) was different from 0 or not. Results expressed as standardized response mean (SRM) calculated as ratio of mean change over standard deviation of the change. A non significant test (p value ≥0.05) means the component had a significant influence to global EULAR RAID score.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Participants Achieving a Moderate or Good EULAR Response Rate at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    EULAR response rate is based on DAS28. For DAS28 ≤3.2 at observation (low disease activity), change from baseline of <-1.2=good response or ≥-1.2 to <-0.6=moderate response; DAS28 >3.2 to 5.1 at observation (moderate or high disease activity), change from baseline of <-1.2 or ≥-1.2 to <-0.6=moderate response; DAS28 >5.1 (high disease activity) at observation, change from baseline of <-1.2=moderate response. DAS28 calculated using the 28 joints count, ESR mm/hour, and PGA of disease activity (participant rated arthritis activity measured on 11-point rating scale: 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]).

  2. Minimal Clinically Important Improvement (MCII) of the EULAR-RAID Score: 75th Percentile of Change at Week 4 and Week 12

    Time frame: Week 4, Week 12

    MCII is a 2-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 48 hours. Question 1: in comparison to study start (Improved, No Change, or Worse). Question 2: if response was Improved, participant rated how important the improvement was (Very important, Moderately important, Slightly important, or Not important at all). The MCII score is defined as the 75th percentile of the change in EULAR-RAID score between baseline and observation among participants whose evaluation of the response therapy at observation was Moderately or Slightly important improvement.

  3. Percentage of Participants Achieving a Minimal Clinically Important Improvement (MCII) Score at Week 4 Who Had Moderately or Slightly Important Improvement at Week 4, Week 12, or Last Observation (Last Obs)

    Time frame: Week 4, Week 12, and Last observation up to Week 12

    MCII is a 2-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 48 hours. Question 1: in comparison to study start (Improved, No change, or Worse). Question 2: if response was Improved, participant rated how important the improvement was (Very important, Moderately important, Slightly important, or Not important at all). MCII score at Week 4 calculated on participants with Moderately or Slightly important improvement (Mod/Slightly Imp Improvement) achieved at observation.

  4. Percentage of Participants Achieving a Minimal Clinically Important Improvement Score at Week 12 Who Had Moderately or Slightly Important Improvement at Week 4, Week 12, or Last Observation (Last Obs)

    Time frame: Week 4, Week 12, and Last observation up to Week 12

    MCII is a 2-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 48 hours. Question 1: in comparison to study start (Improved, No change, or Worse). Question 2: if response was Improved, participant rated how important the improvement was (Very important, Moderately important, Slightly important, or Not important at all). MCII score at Week 12 calculated on participants with Moderately or Slightly important improvement (Mod/Slightly Imp Improvement) achieved at observation.

  5. Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) of the EULAR-RAID Score: 75th Percentile of Change at Week 4 and Week 12

    Time frame: Week 4, Week 12

    PASS is a 1-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 48 hours (If you were to remain in the next few months as you were during the last hours, would this be Acceptable or Unacceptable to you?). PASS score is defined as the 75th percentile of the change in EULAR-RAID score between baseline and observation among participants whose evaluation of their symptom state at observation was Acceptable.

  6. Percentage of Participants Achieving a Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) Score at Week 4 Who Had an Acceptable Symptom State at Week 4, Week 12, or Last Observation (Last Obs)

    Time frame: Week 4, Week 12, and Last observation up to Week 12

    PASS is a 1-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 48 hours (If you were to remain in the next few months as you were during the last hours, would this be acceptable or unacceptable to you?). PASS score at Week 4 calculated on participants with Acceptable symptom state achieved at observation.

  7. Percentage of Participants Achieving a Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) Score at Week 12 Who Had an Acceptable Symptom State at Week 4, Week 12, or Last Observation (Last Obs)

    Time frame: Week 4, Week 12, and Last observation up to Week 12

    PASS is a 1-question assessment of how rheumatoid arthritis has affected the participant in the last 48 hours (If you were to remain in the next few months as you were during the last hours, would this be acceptable or unacceptable to you?). PASS score at Week 12 calculated on participants with Acceptable symptom state achieved at observation.

  8. Percentage of Participants Achieving > 1.2 Improvement in DAS28 at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    DAS28 calculated from number of painful and swollen joints using 28 joints count (PJC, SJC), ESR (mm/hour), and patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis activity measured on 11-point rating scale scored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56*square root (√) (PJC28) + 0.28 *√ (SJC28) + 0.70*ln ESR + 0.014*PGA*10. DAS28 score >5.1=higher disease activity; ≤3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=clinical remission. Achievement of >1.2 improvement defined as decrease in DAS28 >1.2 (i.e., change in DAS28 < -1.2).

  9. Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    DAS28 calculated from number of painful and swollen joints using 28 joints count (PJC, SJC), ESR (mm/hour), and patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis activity measured on 11-point rating scalescored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56*square root (√) (PJC28) + 0.28 *√ (SJC28) + 0.70*ln ESR + 0.014*PGA*10. DAS28 score >5.1=higher disease activity; ≤3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=clinical remission.

  10. Percentage of Participants Achieving Low Disease Activity (DAS28 ≤3.2) at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    DAS28 calculated from number of painful and swollen joints using 28 joints count (PJC, SJC), ESR (mm/hour), and patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis activity measured on 11-point rating scale scored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56*square root (√) (PJC28) + 0.28 *√ (SJC28) + 0.70*ln ESR + 0.014*PGA*10. DAS28 score >5.1=higher disease activity; ≤3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=clinical remission.

  11. Percentage of Participants Achieving > 0.6 DAS28 Response at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    DAS28 calculated from number of painful and swollen joints using 28 joints count (PJC, SJC), ESR (mm/hour), and patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis activity measured on 11-point rating scale scored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56*square root (√) (PJC28) + 0.28 *√ (SJC28) + 0.70*ln ESR + 0.014*PGA*10. DAS28 score >5.1=higher disease activity; ≤3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=clinical remission. Achievement of >0.6 DAS28 response defined as decrease in DAS28 > 0.6 (i.e. change in DAS28 < -0.6).

  12. Time to Achievement of Sustained Low Disease Activity Score (LDAS): DAS28 ≤3.2

    Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12

    Time to sustained LDAS measured as maintenance of low disease activity score beyond Week 12. DAS28 calculated from number of painful and swollen joints using 28 joints count (PJC, SJC), ESR (mm/hour), and patient's global assessment of disease activity (arthritis activity measured on 11-point rating scale scored 0 [none] to 10 [extreme]). DAS28 score calculated as 0.56*square root (√) (PJC28) + 0.28 *√ (SJC28) + 0.70*ln ESR + 0.014*PGA*10. DAS28 score >5.1=higher disease activity; ≤3.2=low disease activity; <2.6=clinical remission.

  13. Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response: responder = ≥20% improvement in tender and swollen joint count and ≥20% improvement in at least 3 of 5 ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain (scored 1=extreme pain to 6=no pain; score transformed to 0 to 100: higher score indicates less pain), Patient's Global Assessment and Physician's Global Assessment of disease activity (assess arthritis activity; both scored 0=none to 10=extreme), Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (assess amount of difficulty to perform an activity scored 0=no difficulty to 3=unable to do), and ESR.

  14. Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 Response at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response: responder = ≥50% improvement in tender and swollen joint count and ≥50% improvement in at least 3 of 5 ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain (scored 1=extreme pain to 6=no pain; score transformed to 0 to 100: higher score indicates less pain), Patient's Global Assessment and Physician's Global Assessment of disease activity (assess arthritis activity; both scored 0=none to 10=extreme), Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (assess amount of difficulty to perform an activity scored 0=no difficulty to 3=unable to do), and ESR.

  15. Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 Response at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    American College of Rheumatology 70% (ACR70) response: responder = ≥70% improvement in tender and swollen joint count and ≥70% improvement in at least 3 of 5 ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain (scored 1=extreme pain to 6=no pain; score transformed to 0 to 100: higher score indicates less pain), Patient's Global Assessment and Physician's Global Assessment of disease activity (assess arthritis activity; both scored 0=none to 10=extreme), Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (assess amount of difficulty to perform an activity scored 0=no difficulty to 3=unable to do), and ESR.

  16. Percentage of Participants With American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 90 Response at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    American College of Rheumatology 90% (ACR90) response: responder = ≥90% improvement in tender and swollen joint count and ≥90% improvement in at least 3 of 5 ACR core measures: patient assessment of pain (scored 1=extreme pain to 6=no pain; score transformed to 0 to 100: higher score indicates less pain), Patient's Global Assessment and Physician's Global Assessment of disease activity (assess arthritis activity; both scored 0=none to 10=extreme), Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (assess amount of difficulty to perform an activity scored 0=no difficulty to 3=unable to do), and ESR.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer

Industry

Collaborators

  • Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center
  • SODIA
  • Umanis
  • depolabo

Registry information

Official study title

Open-Label Study To Evaluate The EULAR-RAID Score, Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact Of Disease Score, In Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Eligible To Etanercept And Who Will Receive Etanercept

Acronym: Rainbow

Important dates

Study start
2008
Primary completion
2010
Study completion
2010
First posted
Oct 7, 2008
Registry last updated
Jul 29, 2011

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.

Related clinical trials

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